T. Kasi

The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident and sued the vehicle manufacturer and dealer.

In a second action, the plaintiffs sued their insurer for failing to preserve the vehicle.

The insurer issued a third-party claim against the plaintiffs' lawyers, alleging they were negligent in failing to preserve the evidence.

The third-party lawyers moved to strike the claim.

The court granted the motion, holding that any negligence by the lawyers fell within the scope of their agency and would be attributable to the plaintiffs, making the third-party claim unnecessary.

The plaintiffs moved to set aside a registrar’s administrative dismissal of their action for delay under Rule 48.14 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

The court applied the Reid factors governing motions to set aside dismissal orders, including the explanation for delay, inadvertence, promptness of the motion, and prejudice to the defendant.

The court found that the plaintiffs had provided no satisfactory explanation for several years of inactivity and failed to demonstrate that they always intended to advance the action toward trial.

Although actual prejudice to the defendant was not conclusively established, the court held that the unexplained delay and failure to comply with a status hearing timetable justified maintaining the dismissal.

The motion to set aside the administrative dismissal was therefore denied.