Godzisz et al. v. McPherson et al.

CITATION: Godzisz et al. v. McPherson et al., 2015 ONSC 3776
COURT FILE NO.: CV-15-526107
DATE: 20150612

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO

RE: STEVEN MICHAEL GODZISZ and MARY LYNN GODZISZ (ALSO KNOWN AS MARY LYNN DICARLO), Plaintiffs

-AND-

KIRK MCPHERSON, SULLIVAN FESTERYGA, LLP, THE ROYAL BANK OF CANADA, THE BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA, THE TORONTO-DOMINION BANK, PROVINCE OF ONTARIO, STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY, DAN LAWRIE INSURANCE BROKERS LIMITED, STONERIDGE INSURANCE BROKERS, THE GUARANTEE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, TISURA SURETY INSURANCE COMPANY, FIRST CANADIAN TITLE COMPANY LIMITED, WILLIAM THATCHER, THATCHER AND WANDS, LLP, BLANEY MCMURTRY, LLP, JOHN MILLER, COLIN MILLER, MILLER ALEXANDER, BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS, RICHARD SKIBINSKI, SZPIECH, ELLIS, SKIBINSKI, SHIPTON LAW OFFICE, FOREMAN, ROSENBLATT AND LEWIS, BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS, YORK LAW CENTRE, O'CONNOR, MACLEOD, HANNA LLP, MICHAEL N. RUBENSTEIN, BARRISTER & SOLICITOR, CHRISTOPHER C. BREEN, BARRISTER & SOLICITOR, CASS & BISHOP BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, RE/MAX ABOUTOWNE REALTY CORPORATION, SUTTON ABOUT TOWN REALTY INC., RIGHT AT HOME REALTY INC., HOMELIFE PROFESSIONALS REALTY INC., TERESA HILDERING, HEATHER CHRISTIE, MICHAEL BLENDEMAN, JUDY AITKIN, TAMMY THOMAS, JERRY KIRK, DREW MITCHELL, KEVIN KORKERUS, KELLY KORKERUS, CINDY MYERS, JOHN STEIFELMYER, JAMIE MCKIE, JENNIFER MCKIE, ANN DRAZENOVICH, ALI ISSA, RANA ISSA, Defendants

BEFORE: F.L. Myers J.

READ: June 12, 2015

Endorsement

[1] By endorsement dated May 5, 2015, I directed the registrar to deliver a notice in Form 2.1A to the plaintiffs inviting them to make written submissions as to why the claim should not be dismissed as being frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process of the court on its face.

[2] Notice in Form 2.1A was duly served on the plaintiffs by mail to the address shown on the statement of claim. No submissions have been made by the plaintiffs within the allotted time.

[3] As set out in my prior endorsement, the claim details several real estate transactions in which the plaintiffs engaged since 1997. They bought and sold a number of properties; paid lawyers; obtained mortgages; made regular mortgage payments; and were called upon to account for their debts over 25 years. To read the statement of claim, the plaintiffs seem to say that they never received title to any of the properties that they bought and sold; they never received mortgage proceeds that they repaid; they never received legal advice for which they paid; and everyone with whom they dealt over decades all conspired to defraud them. In para. 3 of my endorsement I invited the plaintiffs to set out a proper cause of action as follows:

If the plaintiffs have a story to tell in which they can articulate concisely facts that set out a sensible, recognized basis to sue one or more of the defendants, they should explain it in submissions that they can make under Rule 2.1.

[4] The plaintiffs have not responded with submissions. As pleaded, the statement of claim is both frivolous and vexatious on its face. It is inappropriate to name dozens of defendants to force them all to incur costs to respond to bald, internally inconsistent, patently abusive allegations.

[5] The action is therefore dismissed. The defendants listed in para. 1 of my endorsement dated May 5, 2015 are entitled to costs if demanded payable by the plaintiffs jointly and severally forthwith after assessment by an assessment officer.

[6] The court dispenses with any requirement that the plaintiffs approve the form or content of the formal order.

[7] The registrar is directed to send a copy of this endorsement to the plaintiffs and to the counsel for the defendants by mail and by email if it has their email addresses. The registrar shall serve the formal order on the plaintiffs in accordance with Rule 2.1.01(5).

F.L. Myers J.

Date: June 12, 2015