Dale v. Frank

Dale v. Frank

A plaintiff's claim is discovered when they know the material facts necessary to make the claim; they need not know or conclude that the defendant's act was legally wrongful. The motion judge properly applied that standard and correctly granted summary judgment because each appellant knew or ought to have known the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2017 ONCA 32
Parties
Plaintiff (appellant): Melanie Ann Dale; Plaintiff (appellant): Rachel Gladkowski; Plaintiff (appellant): Diane Lesak; Plaintiff (appellant): Patricia Pettit; Plaintiff (appellant): Lidija Poff; Defendant (respondent): Cathy Sheila Frank; Defendant (respondent): Nancy Whitmore; Defendant (respondent): William Frydman; Defendant (respondent): Paul Collins; Defendant (respondent): Dr. Red; Defendant (respondent): Dr. Blue; Defendant (respondent): St. Thomas Elgin General Hospital; Defendant (respondent): Michael John Roe; Defendant (respondent): John Alexander McKenzie
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment Motions
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; leave to appeal costs granted but costs appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Discoverability, Limitations Act 2002 S.5(1)(a), Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Summary Judgment, Costs
Source Language
english
Torts Medical Negligence Civil Procedure Professional Liability Limitation Law Discoverability Limitations Act 2002 S.5(1)(a) Breach of Fiduciary Duty +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Melanie Ann Dale

Plaintiff (appellant)

Rachel Gladkowski

Plaintiff (appellant)

Diane Lesak

Plaintiff (appellant)

Patricia Pettit

Plaintiff (appellant)

Lidija Poff

Plaintiff (appellant)

Cathy Sheila Frank

Defendant (respondent)

Nancy Whitmore

Defendant (respondent)

William Frydman

Defendant (respondent)

Paul Collins

Defendant (respondent)

Dr. Red

Defendant (respondent)

Dr. Blue

Defendant (respondent)

St. Thomas Elgin General Hospital

Defendant (respondent)

Michael John Roe

Defendant (respondent)

John Alexander McKenzie

Defendant (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Summary Judgment Motions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether discoverability requires plaintiff to know defendant's act or omission was wrongful or culpable
  2. 2 Whether s.5(1)(a)(iv) of the Limitations Act required distinct analysis
  3. 3 Whether a public press release about other lawsuits restarts or affects discoverability for specific patients

Ratio Decidendi

A plaintiff's claim is discovered when they know the material facts necessary to make the claim; they need not know or conclude that the defendant's act was legally wrongful. The motion judge properly applied that standard and correctly granted summary judgment because each appellant knew or ought to have known the material facts before the press release, and the press release about other patients did not restart the limitation period.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; leave to appeal costs granted but costs appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed.
  • Motion judge's summary judgment decisions upheld.