Court File and Parties
Citation: Selleck v. Stanutz (Estate) et al., 2026 ONSC 2313 Court File No.: CV-19-80180 Date: 2026-04-17 Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Re: Lindsay Selleck and Sally Selleck, Plaintiffs And: The Estate of Timothy J. Stanutz, by his estate trustee, Sandy Stanutz, Grenville Mutual Insurance Company, The Dominion of Canada General Insurance Company and Certas Home and Auto Insurance Company, Defendants
Before: Mr. Justice Calum MacLeod
Counsel: Joseph Obagi and Sarah E. Russell, for the Plaintiffs K Bruce Chambers, for the Defendants
Heard: April 17, 2026
Endorsement
[1] This is a personal injury action arising from a motor vehicle accident in May of 2017. At that time Lindsay Selleck was operating a dump truck on Mitch Owens Road when the vehicle driven by Timothy Stanutz apparently crossed the centre line and collided with the plaintiff's vehicle. Mr. Stanutz did not survive. The plaintiff suffered significant and life altering injuries and he has never worked again. The plaintiff alleges that the accident was entirely the fault of Mr. Stanutz and he has been pursuing this litigation since 2019.
[2] The tort claim against the Estate was settled on December 22, 2025 when the defendant accepted "the plaintiff's offer dated June 1, 2021 with paragraphs 4, 5 and 7 waived". This avoided a jury trial that was supposed to have commenced this month. There is no doubt that the defendant was to pay the plaintiff $1 million plus costs but the settlement has not yet been paid due to disagreement between the parties over costs and the resulting form of release.
[3] The matter came before me today for what was shown on the docket as a trial over interest and costs although the defendant disputes that characterization. The defendant does not seek to have the agreement set aside and the matter put back on the trial list but contends that the only question properly before me is the question of costs.
[4] The plaintiff seeks a finding that the plaintiff is entitled to payment of the $1 million plus costs of $195,100 to June 21, 2021 (the date of the offer), substantial indemnity costs from the date of the offer to the date of acceptance, their disbursements, costs incurred between the date of acceptance and today, costs of today and a finding that interest is due on the amounts owing from the date of acceptance until paid at 19.9%.
[5] At the conclusion of argument, I indicated I would reserve on the question of the post-offer costs and the quantum of those costs and whether it was open to the court to award interest but I was prepared to rule on the terms of the accepted offer.
[6] The relevant terms of the offer to settle served on June 21, 2025 are as follows:
THE DEFENDANT, the Stanutz Estate, shall pay to the Plaintiffs the sum of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000.00) in full and final satisfaction of all claims relating to the motor vehicle collision of May 15, 2017, exclusive of costs.
THE DEFENDANT, the Stanutz Estate, shall pay costs of this action fixed in the amount of $150,000.00 for fees, $22,500.00 for HST on fees, and $22,600.00 for disbursements (inclusive of HST), provided this offer is accepted on or before 4:30 p.m. on June 21, 2021. If this offer is accepted subsequent to 4:30 p.m. on June 21, 2021, and prior to the commencement of the hearing, the Stanutz Estate shall pay additional costs of this action incurred from and including June 21, 2020 through to the date of acceptance of this offer, on a substantial indemnity basis, in an amount to be agreed upon or fixed by a Superior Court Judge.
[7] There can be no doubt that both counsel had the offer before them in the exchange of emails leading up to acceptance because firstly, there had been specific agreement to extend the expiry date on the offer. Secondly, there was specific reference to the offer of June 21, 2025. Thirdly the defendant had requested and the plaintiff had agreed to waive paragraphs 4, 5 and 7. The waived terms included an admission of 100% liability by the defendant, assignment of rights under the Insurance Act, and the production by the Estate of a sworn statement of net worth.
[8] The correspondence leading to acceptance was precise and unequivocal.
[9] Accordingly, I find that since the offer was accepted well after June 21, 2021, the agreement was to pay $1 million plus the itemized costs in the first sentence of paragraph 2. That is the amount set out in the release signed by the plaintiffs and forwarded by Mr. Obagi - $1,195,100.00. The defendant also agreed to pay additional costs of the action incurred from June 21, 2020 to the date of acceptance "on a substantial indemnity basis". The latter was to be quantified by agreement or "fixed by a Superior Court Judge".
[10] As indicated above, I am reserving to consider whether or not all of the fees and disbursements itemized by the Plaintiff in the Bill of Costs should be included in the amount to be fixed. I must also consider whether, without a formal motion or other proceeding, I have residual jurisdiction to award interest from the date of settlement until paid, what the rate of interest should be, and what costs should be awarded for today. Needless to say, the parties are at liberty to settle those amounts without waiting for a ruling.
[11] In the interim, as the matter is settled subject only to the ruling as to what additional amounts must be paid, there is no justification for continuing to withhold the settlement funds.
Justice C. MacLeod
Date: April 17, 2026