W.J. Leslie

The plaintiff brought a motion to amend her statement of claim in a medical malpractice action against an otolaryngologist.

The defendants opposed several amendments, arguing they sought to add statute-barred causes of action and withdraw an admission.

The court found that the proposed amendments regarding two additional surgeries performed on the same day added new causes of action outside the limitation period.

The court also refused leave to withdraw an admission regarding when a risk discussion occurred, as the plaintiff failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the change in position.

The contested amendments were dismissed.

The defendants brought a motion for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's action, which sought to set aside a Declaration and Deed of Gift and declare an oral agreement for property sale.

The plaintiff alleged an oral agreement to sell property for $700,000, with annual interest payments, despite a written deed of gift stating "no consideration other than natural love and affection" and an adjusted cost base payment.

The court found genuine issues for trial, particularly concerning the existence of the oral agreement, the nature of a $35,000 payment, and the timing of an invoice, all of which raised credibility issues.

The motion for summary judgment was dismissed, as the court was not confident it could fairly decide the dispute without a full trial and oral evidence.

A dispute arose from an agreement of purchase and sale requiring the defendant to reconvey a five‑acre parcel to the plaintiff following a severance under the Planning Act.

The defendant refused to sign severance documentation, asserting that its lease obligations with a third party required exclusive access and prevented consent to the severance.

The court held that the agreement’s entire agreement clause barred reliance on implied terms and that the defendant’s obligation to cooperate with the severance was clear and unconditional.

The proposed severance did not interfere with the approved development plan, and the defendant’s conflicting agreement with a third party did not excuse performance.

Because the plaintiff had effectively paid $200,000 for the reconveyed land and damages would be inadequate, the court granted specific performance compelling the defendant to execute documents and cooperate with the severance process.

Two actions were tried together regarding a 50-acre parcel of land.

In the first action, the plaintiff claimed $100,000 plus interest on a promissory note forming part of the consideration for the sale of a one-half interest in the property to the defendant company.

In the second action, the defendant company claimed the plaintiff and her husband made fraudulent misrepresentations to induce the purchase.

The court dismissed the fraudulent misrepresentation claim, finding no such representations were made and the purchaser had ample opportunity to review the transaction details.

The court upheld the validity of the promissory note and awarded judgment to the plaintiff for $100,000 plus prejudgment interest.