Court File and Parties

CITATION: Lin v. William Rock et al. 2015 ONSC 2421

COURT FILE NO.: CV-14-512630

DATE: 20150414

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: KATHRYN LIN, Plaintiff

AND:

WILLIAM ROCK and WILLIAM ROCK MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, Defendants

BEFORE: F.L. Myers J.

READ: April 14, 2015

ENDORSEMENT

[1] This matter was referred to me by the registrar upon the written request of counsel for the defendants pursuant to rule 2.1.01(6).

[2] The plaintiff has brought a motion to a judge returnable May 4, 2015. The relief sought by the plaintiff is to make a “complaint” about what happened to her in court previously. She asks that an unidentified order be set aside and that she be granted judgment against the defendants for damages exceeding $1.6 million. She relies upon section 86.2 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.C.43. That section deals with complaints in writing to the Chief Justice alleging misconduct by a case management master.

[3] The plaintiff has sued the defendants for damages for harassment that she says they inflicted upon her as an employee. By order dated February 11, 2015 Master Dash set aside the plaintiff’s noting in default of the defendants. He also struck out portions of the plaintiff’s fresh statement of claim. Finally, the Master ordered the plaintiff to pay costs of the motion to the defendants in the amount of $2,500.

[4] Ms. Lin appealed to a judge. By order dated March 26, 2015, reported at 2015 ONSC 1929, Mr. Justice Whitaker dismissed Ms. Lin’s appeal from the Master’s decision. Mr. Justice Whittaker ordered the plaintiff to pay another $5,501.69 in costs to the defendants.

[5] It is apparent from the plaintiff’s notice of motion that is currently before me, and the claims she made to Master Dash and Mr. Justice Whittaker, that Ms. Lin does not really understand the process of how to bring a lawsuit in the Superior Court of Justice. She needs help or she will not be able to get her case heard.

[6] There are many procedural steps that must be followed to bring a lawsuit in this court. Some of the steps can be very technical and difficult to understand for a person who is not a lawyer. They include preparing very formal documents. There are rules about what these documents can say to make sure that they are fair. Master Dash explained some of the rules about a statement of claim to Ms. Lin in his reasons.

[7] There are other steps that have to happen prior to the case being heard. Ms. Lin needs legal advice to help her move forward in her lawsuit with these procedures.

[8] Ms. Lin can try to get legal help by contacting the Law Society’s Lawyer Referral Service at http://www.lawsocietyreferralservice.ca/.

[9] Ms. Lin can also seek the free legal help from:

a. Pro Bono Law, at 393 University Ave., Room 110, Toronto; or

b. Downtown Legal Services, at the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 655 Spadina Avenue, Toronto; or

c. Community Legal Aid Services Program, at Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Ignat Kaneff Building, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto.

[10] Rule 2.1.01(1) allows the court to dismiss a motion if on its face it is frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process. Rule 2.1.01(3) provides, subject to an order to the contrary, that in the normal course the court will call on the moving party to make written submissions as to why the motion should not be dismissed. In my view, this is a case for dispensing with written submissions from Ms. Lin under rule 2.1.01(3). The proper, respectful result is simply to dismiss Ms. Lin’s motion.

[11] Ms. Lin is entitled to her day in court. She is entitled to be heard by a judge or a master and to feel that she has been heard. As a litigant, whether represented by counsel or self-represented, she is entitled to be treated with respect. There is a difference however, between treating a person with respect and treating arguments and positions with respect. There is no submission that Ms. Lin can make to justify bringing a motion to a judge of this court to make a “complaint” about Justice Whitaker, Master Dash or their decisions. Neither can Ms. Lin seek judgment before her statement of claim is finalized and with no supporting evidence. There is a time and a place where a judge or a master will hear Ms. Lin’s evidence about the harassment that she says she suffered. That will be at a trial or at an appropriate motion brought at the right time and in the right way. The current motion however, cannot succeed. Pretending otherwise pending receipt of submissions would be disingenuous bordering on paternalistic.

[12] In my view, I treat Ms. Lin more respectfully, as an intelligent adult, by telling her that she cannot move under s.86.2 of the Courts of Justice Act before a judge of the court. If Ms. Lin wishes to make a written complaint of misconduct by Master Dash to the Chief Justice under section 86.2(1) of the Courts of Justice Act she can send a letter to the Chief Justice’s office to start the complaints process. If Ms. Lin wishes to appeal from the decision of Mr. Justice Whittaker, she will need legal advice to determine how to appeal from that type of order. Figuring out how to appeal on procedural issues can be quite complicated. Ms. Lin should get legal advice very quickly because there are very short time limits that apply to appeals.

[13] It is more respectful to tell Ms. Lin that her motion is a wrong step and to help her obtain legal advice than to call for submissions that will not matter in order to provide an appearance that she is being heard. It is not treating someone respectfully to be disingenuous toward her. Ms. Lin’s position on this motion is frivolous. She cannot obtain the relief that she seeks because it is not available as a matter of law under the Rules of Civil Procedure or the Courts of Justice Act. Ms. Lin’s argument does not deserve respectful treatment. But she does. And it is not respectful, in my view, to call for submissions disingenuously while time is running on an appeal period or to have Ms. Lin attend court to make a “complaint” and then to subject her to yet another costs award.

[14] Ms. Lin’s motion commenced by notice of motion dated April 1, 2015 is dismissed without costs. The registrar shall serve a copy of this endorsement by mail on the plaintiff and by email to counsel for the defendants. I dispense with the need for Ms. Lin to approve the formal order as to form and content. The registrar shall release the appointment scheduled for May 4, 2015.

[15] I urge Ms. Lin to try to get legal help if she wants to move forward with this lawsuit.

F.L. Myers J.

Date: April 14, 2015