CITATION: Craven v. Osidacz, 2011 ONCA 464
DATE: 20110620
DOCKET: C53122
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
Goudge, MacFarland and Watt JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Julie Craven, John Craven, Maureen Craven, Sean Craven, and Louise Huzul
Plaintiffs (Respondents)
and
Michael Osidacz, Elizabeth Osidacz, Richard Chmura, Lisa Chmura and Lindsey Andraza
Defendant (Appellant)
and
The Estate of Andrew Peter Osidacz (Michael Osidacz, Trustee)
Non-party (Respondent)
Richard Chmura, acting in person
Michael Jaeger, for the respondents
Heard: June 17, 2011
On appeal from the judgment of Justice James R. H. Turnbull of the Superior Court of Justice, dated December 7, 2010.
APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT
[1] The appellant appeals only the dismissal of his request to preserve the bathroom for the purpose of taking further pictures of it that he says would be relevant to his defence. The order appealed from also dismisses his request for production of the existing pictures of the bathroom on the basis that pictures of that room are of no relevance to this action or Mr. Chmura’s defence to it. He has not appealed from that. Given the finding that pictures of the room are not relevant we see no basis to interfere with Turnbull J.’s order that preservation of the bathroom for further pictures is not required.
[2] The appeal is dismissed.
[3] Costs to the respondent fixed at $2,500 all in.
“S.T. Goudge J.A.”