Superior Court of Justice - Ontario

CITATION: Boodhoo v. Persaud, 2017 ONSC 4146

COURT FILE NO.: 01-1123/07

DATE: 20170705

B E T W E E N:

DIANE BOODHOO and DIANE BOODHOO as estate trustee of the ESTATE OF ALICIA BOODHOO

Plaintiffs

– and –

THAKUR (JOHN) PERSUAD and SURUJDAI (SHANTI) PERSAUD,

Defendants

BEFORE: F.L. Myers, J.

COUNSEL: Robert P. Sullivan and Wade Morris, counsel for the Plaintiff

Mark M. Persaud, counsel for the Defendants

HEARD: July 5, 2017

SUPPLEMENTARY ENDORSEMENT

[1] Mr. Mark Persaud, counsel for the defendants, takes umbrage with the sentences in my endorsement dated June 21, 2017, reported at 2017 ONSC 3856 in which I wrote:

Mr. Mark Persaud takes umbrage at the suggestion that he might bring his paralegal, the defendants’ daughter Tisha Persaud, to the examinations for discovery. I am unclear on why this is so given that she works as staff in his office and he has sent her to court in his stead in this case previously.

[2] Mr. Persaud says that Tisha Persaud is his law clerk and not his paralegal. Moreover, he says that she was sent to court by prior counsel rather than by him. Mr. Persaud argues that the statement impugns his professionalism as he is not someone who would send his law clerk to make an appearance before the Superior Court of Justice.

[3] As a matter of semantics, a law clerk is a paralegal employee. Tisha Persaud is not licensed by the Law Society, but that would make no difference as neither type of employee is entitled to appear in this court. Mr. Persaud was not yet retained when Ms. Persaud appeared. I was told that Mr. Persaud was being consulted to take over the brief. In any event, nothing turns on that day’s events. I mentioned it only as background discussion for the order sought excluding Tisha Persaud from examinations for discovery in this case to which the defendants consented.

[4] Mr. Persaud’s perception of microaggressions has occupied much of his correspondence with counsel opposite and his submissions to the court. He provided opposing counsel with a copy of his acceptance speech for his doctorate honoris causa to support his high professional standing.

[5] I accept without reservation that Mr. Persaud is a lawyer of high esteem. He committed no act that bears any taint of unprofessionalism or criticism on my part in regard to Tisha Persaud’s appearance.

[6] It is apparent from the correspondence that was put before me previously and the discussion in paras. 27 and 28 of my prior endorsement concerning the possibility of further proceedings against Mr. Persaud under Rule 57.07, that counsel were spending an inordinate amount of time on issues among themselves. I understand from costs submissions received that the plaintiff has decided not to seek relief against Mr. Persaud at this time. In my view, maintaining focus on resolving the issues among the clients, rather than counsel, is likely to be the path to the most efficient, affordable, and proportionate resolution of the matters in dispute in the litigation.

F.L. Myers, J.

Date: July 5, 2017