COURT FILE NO.: CV-17-588911
DATE: 2020/01/29
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
TEPLITSKY, COLSON LLP
Plaintiff
- and -
2169252 ONTARIO INC., DME MEDEQUIP INC. O/A MEDICHAIR TRENT, RON SEIDERER and ALLISON SEIDERER ALSO KNOWN AS ALLISON ROLPH
Defendants
Ian N. Roher and Eitan Kadouri for the Plaintiff
Ian Peddle for the Defendants
HEARD: In writing
PERELL, J.
REASONS FOR DECISION - COSTS
[1] Pursuant to the Solicitors Act,[^1] on March 14, 2017, the Defendants to this action, Ron Seiderer, Allison Seiderer, (also known as Allison Rolph), and 2169252 Ontario Inc. and DME Medequip Inc., the corporations that operated as MEDIchair Trent, obtained a registrar’s order (Court File No. 59171) in Peterborough, Ontario to assess the accounts (totaling $361,273.92) of the Toronto law firm, Teplitsky, Colson LLP, which is the Plaintiff in the action now before the court (I shall hereafter refer to the Defendants collectively as the Seiderers).
[2] On December 21, 2017, Teplitsky, Colson LLP commenced the action now before the court. In the action, Teplitsky, Colson LLP sought payment of $216,273.92, the balance of its accounts unpaid by the Seiderers. Teplitsky, Colson LLP also sought damages for breach of contract, misrepresentation, deceit, and unjust enrichment. It sought punitive damages of $50,000 for fraud and deceit. It also sought a charging order and or a charging lien against: (a) certain settlement funds received by the Seiderers; (b) their home; and (c) their business.
[3] Then, by motion, Teplitsky, Colson LLP sought an Order: (a) staying the Assessment pending the final disposition of their Superior Court action; and (b) if necessary, granting leave of the court to commence or prosecute that action nunc pro tunc.
[4] By cross-motion, the Seiderers sought an Order staying Teplitsky, Colson LLP’s action until the completion of the Assessment under the Solicitors Act.
[5] I granted the cross-motion, and I dismissed the motion. As a term of my Order, I directed the Seiderers to disclose the funds that they have offered to hold in their lawyer’s trust account pending the resolution of the Assessment and to pay those funds into court pending the resolution of the Assessment.[^2]
[6] In my Reasons for Decision, I stated that if the parties could not agree about the matter of costs, they may make submissions in writing. I alerted the parties that it was presently my view that there should be no order as to costs.
[7] The parties did not agree about the matter of costs, and the Seiderers claimed costs of $9,553.98, all inclusive, on a substantial indemnity basis. Of this sum $1,433.98 was for disbursements.
[8] In response to the Seiderers claim for costs, Teplitsky, Colson LLP claimed costs of $24,611.67, all inclusive, on a partial indemnity basis. Of this sum, $5,097.17 was for disbursements. Teplitsky, Colson LLP would not have claimed costs had the Seiderers had forborne making a claim for costs.
[9] Having read the parties costs submissions, I am not persuaded that my view that there should be no order as to costs should be changed.
[10] Although the Seiderers were perhaps, technically speaking, the successful party, in that their motion was granted and in that Teplitsky, Colson LLP’s motion was dismissed, given the terms of the order, and the clarity brought by the legal and factual issues decided on the motions, a more accurate assessment is that there was divided success or such a qualified success that it is appropriate to exercise my discretion to make no order as to costs for either party.
[11] For present purposes, I see no purpose to air the laundry of this soiled lawyer and client relationship, save to say that for the purposes of the motion and the cross-motion, there was enough disproportionate and inappropriate steps taken be both sides of the dispute to justify having both sides bear their own costs.
[12] Thus, I shall make no order as to costs.
Perell, J.
Released: January 29, 2020
Teplitsky, Colson LLP v. 2169252 Ontario Inc., 2020 ONSC 557
COURT FILE NO.: CV-17-588911
DATE: 2020/01/29
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
Teplitsky, Colson LLP
Plaintiff
- and -
2169252 ONTARIO INC., DME MEDEQUIP INC. O/A MEDICHAIR TRENT, RON SEIDERER and ALLISON SEIDERER ALSO KNOWN AS ALLISON ROLPH
Defendants
REASONS FOR DECISION - COSTS
PERELL J.
Released: January 29, 2020
[^1]: R.S.O. 1990, c. S.15.
[^2]: Teplitsky, Colson LLP v. 2169252 Ontario Inc., 2019 ONSC 7026