Future Image Holding Corporation v. Lason, Inc.

Future Image Holding Corporation v. Lason, Inc.

The Court found that triable issues existed regarding Mr. Todd's duty to disclose and his participation in inflating EBITDA through off-balance-sheet payments and tailwind revenues; those triable issues made summary judgment inappropriate, so the motion was dismissed and the motion judge's order set aside.

Citation
C38051
Parties
Plaintiff (respondent): Future Image Holding Corporation; Plaintiff (respondent): DASA Holdings Inc.; Respondent (appellant): Lason Inc.; Respondent (appellant): Bank One, Michigan; Respondent (appellant): Lason Canada Company
Court
Court of Appeal for Ontario
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Superior Court of Ontario Judgment of March 12, 2002; Motion for Summary Judgment Before Motion Judge
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of Jennings J. set aside; motion for summary judgment dismissed.
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Duty to Disclose, Misleading Financial Statements, EBITDA Calculation, Triable Issue
Source Language
English
Civil Commercial Law Corporate Law Procedural Law Summary Judgment Duty to Disclose Misleading Financial Statements EBITDA Calculation +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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Future Image Holding Corporation

Plaintiff (respondent)

DASA Holdings Inc.

Plaintiff (respondent)

Lason Inc.

Respondent (appellant)

Bank One, Michigan

Respondent (appellant)

Lason Canada Company

Respondent (appellant)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal From Superior Court of Ontario Judgment of March 12, 2002; Motion for Summary Judgment Before Motion Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr. Todd, as president of Lason Canada, had a duty to disclose off-balance-sheet payments to employees
  2. 2 Whether Mr. Todd disclosed those payments or participated in hiding them
  3. 3 Whether inclusion of tailwind revenues for the stub period inflated EBITDA

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that triable issues existed regarding Mr. Todd's duty to disclose and his participation in inflating EBITDA through off-balance-sheet payments and tailwind revenues; those triable issues made summary judgment inappropriate, so the motion was dismissed and the motion judge's order set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of Jennings J. set aside; motion for summary judgment dismissed.

Orders

  • Motion for summary judgment dismissed and order of Jennings J. set aside.
  • Costs of the motion before Jennings J. to be borne by the parties.