Court File and Parties

CITATION: Zenteno v. Ticknor, 2011 ONCA 722

DATE: 20111118

DOCKET: C52310

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

MacPherson and LaForme JJ.A. and Hackland J. (ad hoc)

BETWEEN

Lina Jeannette Ruiz Zenteno

Applicant/Respondent

and

David John Ticknor

Respondent/Appellant

COUNSEL:

Chris Argiropoulos, for the appellant

Mark D. Staats, for the respondent

HEARD AND RELEASED ORALLY: November 17, 2011

On appeal from judgment of Justice John Cavarzan of the Superior Court of Justice, dated May 20, 2010.

ENDORSEMENT

[1] Because he did not fulfill certain undertakings, the appellant’s pleadings were struck and the matter proceeded as a default judgment hearing. The only witnesses at the hearing were Ms. Zenteno and her sister.

[2] The application judge awarded Ms. Zenteno a lump sum payment for spousal support in the amount of $193,385 to be secured by a charge on the property owned by the appellant and a 2002 automobile to be transferred to her absolutely in the amount of $6,615 which is to be deducted from the lump sum award.

[3] The sole issue on this appeal was the correctness of the trial judge’s order of a lump sum payment for spousal support and a securing of that order by way of charge against the appellant’s solely owned property.

[4] Both parties agree, as do we, that this court’s recent decision in Davis v. Crawford, 2011 ONCA 294 provides the principal authority for this appeal. And, as Davis reminds us, appeal courts will not interfere with support orders unless the reasons disclose an error in principle, a significant misapprehension of the evidence or unless the award is clearly wrong.

[5] In this case, there was sufficient evidence, limited as it was given the circumstances, upon which the application judge could order the lump sum payment he did. In particular, his review of the evidence of the appellant’s abusive behaviour, intention not to pay spousal support and probable non-compliance with a court order were all supported by the evidence before him.

[6] Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Costs are payable to the respondent fixed at $4,000 inclusive of disbursements and HST, payable to Legal Aid Ontario.

“J.C. MacPherson J.A.”

“H.S. LaForme J.A.”

“Charles Hackland J. (ad hoc)”