Burden v. Burden

Burden v. Burden

The court struck entire affidavits of Carroll, Porter and LaHaye as irrelevant, opinionated or inflammatory to the narrow interim issues, and struck specified portions of Dr. Burden's affidavit (everything after the third sentence of para.55, para.58 and para.59) because the material was not relevant to the interim motions or invaded privacy; the court ordered removal and sealing of the struck third‑party affidavits under Rule 39.04(4) and annotation of the respondent's affidavit in the file.

Citation
2012 NSSC 214
Parties
Petitioner: Krista Lynne Burden; Respondent: George Manuel Burden
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Family Law Interim Motions (spousal Support, Child Support, Custody and Access) / Motion to Strike Affidavit Evidence Decided Prior to Scheduled Interim Hearing
Outcome
Motion to strike granted in large part: three third‑party affidavits struck in entirety and specified passages of respondent's affidavit struck; remaining impugned passages excluded from consideration at the interim hearing; seized affidavits to be removed from public file and sealed; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Interim Spousal Support, Interim Child Support, Custody and Access, Admissibility of Affidavit Evidence, Striking Evidence, Cohabitation Agreement
Source Language
English
Family Law Evidence Civil Procedure Interim Spousal Support Interim Child Support Custody and Access Admissibility of Affidavit Evidence Striking Evidence +1 more

Case Brief

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Krista Lynne Burden

Petitioner

George Manuel Burden

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Family Law Interim Motions (spousal Support, Child Support, Custody and Access) / Motion to Strike Affidavit Evidence Decided Prior to Scheduled Interim Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether portions of affidavits are relevant to narrow interim issues
  2. 2 Whether challenged material constitutes inadmissible hearsay or opinion
  3. 3 Whether material is vexatious or inflammatory and invades privacy of non-parties

Ratio Decidendi

The court struck entire affidavits of Carroll, Porter and LaHaye as irrelevant, opinionated or inflammatory to the narrow interim issues, and struck specified portions of Dr. Burden's affidavit (everything after the third sentence of para.55, para.58 and para.59) because the material was not relevant to the interim motions or invaded privacy; the court ordered removal and sealing of the struck third‑party affidavits under Rule 39.04(4) and annotation of the respondent's affidavit in the file.

Court Disposition

Motion to strike granted in large part: three third‑party affidavits struck in entirety and specified passages of respondent's affidavit struck; remaining impugned passages excluded from consideration at the interim hearing; seized affidavits to be removed from public file and sealed; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Strike affidavit of Karen Alexandrea Carroll in its entirety
  • Strike affidavit of Richard A. Porter in its entirety