3 total
Interim support denied; estate trustee during litigation appointed to protect the estate.
On an urgent estates motion, the applicant sought interim dependent's support and the appointment of an estate trustee during litigation pending a dependent support application.
The court held the evidentiary record was incomplete and did not establish that the applicant was receiving support from the deceased or fell within an enumerated dependent category under Part V of the Succession Law Reform Act.
Interim support was therefore refused.
However, because estate bills were going unpaid and the estate property was at risk, the court appointed an estate trustee during litigation on usual terms, with the trustee's fees to be borne initially by the applicant's share of the estate subject to reallocation at the merits hearing.
No costs were awarded because the applicant was only partly successful and the motion process was unfair to the self-represented respondent.
The self-represented respondent's motion to dismiss the application was dismissed with costs due to a complete lack of supporting evidence.
The respondent brought a motion seeking to set aside a Registrar's Order to Continue, dismiss the application for delay, dismiss the application against the Estate of Nova Joseph Maille and Concentra Trust as Estate Trustee, and appoint an alternative Estate Trustee during litigation.
The motion was dismissed due to the absence of supporting evidence.
The respondent failed to file any affidavit in support of the motion and relied instead on privileged settlement materials and arguments protesting the contents of affidavits filed by other parties without evidentiary foundation.
The court found the motion ill-fated on its merits and ordered the respondent to pay costs to the applicants and the Estate.
Court slashed estate legal fees of a lawyer-beneficiary who fueled unnecessary sibling litigation.
This decision concerns the costs arising from protracted estate litigation over the administration and distribution of the estate of Maria Giuseppa Cosentino.
The court reviews the history of three related proceedings, the conduct of the parties and their counsel, and the reasonableness of legal fees claimed.
The court finds that much of the litigation was driven by sibling conflict and overreaching claims, particularly by Sam Cosentino, who acted as both lawyer and party.
The court fixes the costs payable from the estate, significantly reducing some claims, and authorizes the estate trustee during litigation to complete the administration and distribution of the estate.