The appellant appealed a motion judge's order dismissing her request for interim support under the Succession Law Reform Act and ordering her to vacate the deceased's home to facilitate its sale.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal regarding interim support, finding the order was interlocutory and the motion judge made no error based on the evidence.
However, the Court allowed the appeal regarding the eviction order, finding the motion judge erred in concluding the estate was losing money on upkeep, as a prior consent order had already addressed those expenses.
The eviction order was set aside.
