The plaintiffs brought a motion to set aside a Registrar's order dismissing their action for delay under Rule 48.14(1).
The action arose from alleged environmental contamination by the defendants' dry cleaning operations.
The court applied the four-factor test for setting aside a dismissal order.
While finding no prejudice to the defendants, the court concluded the plaintiffs failed to adequately explain the litigation delay or their failure to meet the set down deadline.
Furthermore, the plaintiffs' claims were already preserved in a crossclaim in a related, more advanced action.
To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the motion to set aside the dismissal was dismissed.
