Bronson v. Hewitt

Bronson v. Hewitt

The application to admit the fax activity report and to reopen/reconsider was dismissed: the new evidence would not probably have changed the result because core failures (non-disclosure of Harold's right and other acts) remain, and the defendants failed the due diligence requirement; therefore findings of breach of trust and of knowing assistance are maintained.

Citation
2010 BCSC 871
Parties
Plaintiff: Thomas E. Bronson; Plaintiff: J. Tom Bronson; Plaintiff: Lee B. Lewis; Plaintiff: Virginia L. Shaffer; Plaintiff: H. Davis Lewis, Jr.; Plaintiff: Harold D. Lewis, Sr.; Defendant: Howard H. Hewitt; Defendant: A. Eugene Lewis; Defendant: Jennifer Lewis Browning; Defendant: Julie Anne Lewis; Defendant: William David Tompkins, Trustee of the Graham River Trust; Defendant: Graham River Outfitters Ltd.; Defendant: Margaret H. Mason; Defendant: Bull Housser & Tupper; Defendant: Bull, Housser & Tupper LLP; Third Party: Thomas E. Bronson
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Trust and Breach of Fiduciary Duty / Reconsideration Application (admission of New Evidence) Post Judgment Before Formal Order
Outcome
Application to admit new evidence and to reopen/reconsider dismissed; original findings upheld
Legal Topics
Breach of Trust, Knowing Assistance, Reopening Trial, Admission of New Evidence, Adverse Inference, Exoneration of Trustee, Fiduciary Duty
Source Language
English
Trusts Equity Civil Procedure Evidence Breach of Trust Knowing Assistance Reopening Trial Admission of New Evidence +3 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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas E. Bronson

Plaintiff

J. Tom Bronson

Plaintiff

Lee B. Lewis

Plaintiff

Virginia L. Shaffer

Plaintiff

H. Davis Lewis, Jr.

Plaintiff

Harold D. Lewis, Sr.

Plaintiff

Howard H. Hewitt

Defendant

A. Eugene Lewis

Defendant

Jennifer Lewis Browning

Defendant

Julie Anne Lewis

Defendant

William David Tompkins, Trustee of the Graham River Trust

Defendant

Graham River Outfitters Ltd.

Defendant

Margaret H. Mason

Defendant

Bull Housser & Tupper

Defendant

Bull, Housser & Tupper LLP

Defendant

Thomas E. Bronson

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Trust and Breach of Fiduciary Duty / Reconsideration Application (admission of New Evidence) Post Judgment Before Formal Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to admit new fax activity report as fresh evidence
  2. 2 Whether findings that defendants concealed Harold's right to be trustee should be reconsidered
  3. 3 Whether A. Eugene Lewis knowingly assisted in breach of trust

Ratio Decidendi

The application to admit the fax activity report and to reopen/reconsider was dismissed: the new evidence would not probably have changed the result because core failures (non-disclosure of Harold's right and other acts) remain, and the defendants failed the due diligence requirement; therefore findings of breach of trust and of knowing assistance are maintained.

Court Disposition

Application to admit new evidence and to reopen/reconsider dismissed; original findings upheld

Orders

  • Application to admit new evidence dismissed
  • Application to reopen the trial dismissed