DATE: 20020910 DOCKET: C37539

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

RE: JOHN SUSIN (Plaintiff/Appellant) –and– RONALD G. CHAPMAN and BAKER and BAKER (Defendants/Respondents)

BEFORE: O’CONNOR A.C.J.O., CATZMAN and DOHERTY JJ.A.

COUNSEL: John Susin, the appellant in person Sandra L. Secord, for the respondent Ronald G. Chapman Alfred J. Esterbauer, for the respondent Baker and Baker

HEARD: September 6, 2002

RELEASED ORALLY: September 6, 2002

On appeal from the order of Justice Thomas M. Dunn of the Superior Court of Justice dated November 9, 2001.

E N D O R S E M E N T

[1] [1] The order from which this appeal is taken is the order of Dunn J. dated November 9, 2001 and it is the validity of that order, not the validity of the orders that preceded it, with which we are concerned.

[2] [2] The objections Mr. Susin alleged with respect to that order were not addressed to its merits but rather to suggested procedural deficiencies and improprieties. Hill J.’s order dated June 6, 2001 directed Mr. Susin to pay previously ordered costs and security for costs on or before July 15, 2001, failing which his action was to be dismissed without further notice to him. Subsequent letters from counsel for both respondents expressly warned Mr. Susin that, if he did not comply by July 15, 2001, counsel proposed to move to have his action dismissed without further notice to him. He did not do so, and they did exactly what Hill J. had ordered and what they had told the appellant they would do.

[3] [3] We are not persuaded that there was any procedural defect in the manner in which the respondents obtained the order of Dunn J. or in the evidence, which made full and fair disclosure of all material facts, on which it was grounded.

[4] [4] The appeal is dismissed with costs, fixed in the amount of $3,000 (inclusive of disbursements and G.S.T.) for the respondent Baker and Baker and costs, fixed in the same amount, for the respondent Chapman.

Signed: “Dennis O’Connor A.C.J.O.”

“M.A. Catzman J.A.”

“Doherty J.A.”