William Courtland Cline

The moving parties brought a motion for leave to appeal multiple orders and requested extensions of time.

The Divisional Court denied the motion and awarded costs to the respondent in the fixed amount of $2,500.

The defendant brought a motion to quash two summonses to witness issued by the plaintiffs, which sought to examine two of the defendant's lawyers on pending interlocutory motions regarding the sale of jointly owned property.

The court quashed the summonses on three grounds: failure to comply with service requirements under the Rules of Civil Procedure, failure to demonstrate that the lawyers' evidence was relevant and necessary, and abuse of process.

The court found the summonses were issued for ulterior purposes, including gathering evidence for a separate action against the lawyers and attempting to create a conflict of interest to preclude them from acting as counsel.

The appellant appealed a decision of the Superior Court of Justice dismissing her action on the basis of a limitation period and denying relief from forfeiture regarding her late filing of a long-term disability (LTD) claim with the insurer.

Although the respondent conceded that the application judge erred in finding the action was barred by a limitation period, the Court of Appeal found that the relief from forfeiture analysis stood independently and was not tainted by this error.

The Court upheld the application judge's discretionary decision to deny relief from forfeiture.