Who is Todd J. Burke?

Todd J. Burke is an Ontario lawyer (In Private Practice) with 63 court cases on record from 2000 to 2026.

What courts has Todd J. Burke appeared in?

Todd J. Burke has appeared in Superior Court of Justice, Court of Appeal, Divisional Court, with most appearances at the Superior Court of Justice.

How many cases has Todd J. Burke handled?

Todd J. Burke has 63 cases on record from 2000 to 2026.

What judges has Todd J. Burke appeared before?

Todd J. Burke has most frequently appeared before Justice Calum U. C. MacLeod, Justice Robert N. Beaudoin, Justice Marc R. Labrosse.

minicounsel

Civil Litigation - Defendant

Civil Litigation - Plaintiff

Corporate/Commercial Law

Intellectual Property Law

Real Estate Law

Employment and Labour Law

Family and Matrimonial Law

Administrative Law

Charity and Not-For-Profit Law

Wills, Estates, Trusts Law

Todd J. Burke

In Private PracticeSCJ

LSO Profile

Also known as: Todd Burke

LSO #33586B

cases · SCJ, OCA, ODC

Trial

Motion

Costs

Appeal

Sentencing

63 total

Order extending limitation period is final; motion judge erred by deciding extension when facts were disputed.

The plaintiffs sued the defendant engineers for professional negligence regarding a foundation design.

The defendants moved for summary judgment based on the expiry of the one-year limitation period under the Professional Engineers Act.

The motion judge dismissed the summary judgment motion, finding a genuine issue for trial regarding when the plaintiffs discovered the material facts, but simultaneously granted the plaintiffs' cross-motion to extend the limitation period.

The Court of Appeal allowed the defendants' appeal, holding that the order extending the limitation period was a final order and that the motion judge erred by resolving the limitation extension issue while acknowledging a genuine issue for trial existed regarding the plaintiffs' knowledge of the facts.

Charlebois v. Les Entreprises Normand Ravary Ltee, 2006 ONCA 8873

Applicant Counsel

Todd J. Burke

In Private Practice64 cases2000–2026

Phuong Ngo

1 case2001–2001

Rosalie Silberman Abella

OCA1,358 cases2000–2021

Marc R. Labrosse

OCA470 cases2000–2026

James C. MacPherson

OCA2,144 cases2000–2025

OCACourt of AppealJul 4, 2001

Appeal of summary judgment dismissed as appellant provided no evidence to support claims of corporate theft.

The appellant appealed a summary judgment dismissing his action against his former wife, daughter, and a business college.

He alleged that the respondents illegally took the company from him, claiming certain documents were forged.

The Court of Appeal upheld the motions judge's finding that the appellant provided no evidence to substantiate his claims, noting that he had previously declared bankruptcy and sworn he owned no shares.

The appeal was dismissed with costs.

Michael Aristocrat v. Rima Aristocrat, Lali Aristocrat, The Willis Business College Limited operated as Willis College of Business and Technology, 2001 ONCA 8572

Respondent Counsel

Todd J. Burke

In Private Practice64 cases2000–2026

Richard Rudolphe George Marks

Deceased27 cases2000–2018

Domenic A. Crolla

In Private Practice3 cases2000–2008

Michael J. Moldaver

OCA1,742 cases2000–2023

James J. Carthy

OCA348 cases2000–2003

Allan McNiece Austin

OCA164 cases2000–2006

OCACourt of AppealJul 25, 2000

Medical malpractice appeal dismissed for lack of bias, negligence, and causation.

The appellants appealed the dismissal of a medical malpractice action arising from the death of a patient undergoing treatment for tuberculosis.

The appeal focused on recusal, alleged negligence in the physician’s monitoring and follow-up system, and causation.

The court held that, although the trial judge had improperly received information caught by Rule 50.03, the circumstances did not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias requiring recusal.

The court further held there was no basis to disturb the findings that the follow-up system did not establish negligence on the physician’s part and that any failure of follow-up did not cause or contribute to the death, because the accepted evidence showed no signs of hepatitis at the critical January assessment.