On competing civil motions in a mortgage enforcement action, the court addressed whether a retired lawyer and beneficiary could represent a corporate trustee plaintiff under rr. 15.01 and 2.03 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
The court granted relief on consent to amend the corporate defendant name, validate service, and direct that this action and a related action be tried together or consecutively as directed by the trial judge.
Applying discretionary access-to-justice principles and considering the trustee's bare trustee role, beneficiary alignment, inability to fund counsel, and litigation competence of the proposed representative, the court dispensed with strict compliance and granted leave for non-lawyer representation.
The defendants' cross-motion relief, including dismissal requests, conditions, security for costs, and adjournment for further service steps, was dismissed.
