Bronson v. Hewitt

Bronson v. Hewitt

Rule 29(1) must be interpreted consistently with Rule 27(22); interrogatories may require answers on any matter in question in the action generally even if not an issue between the plaintiffs and the particular addressees, therefore the objection by Jennifer and Julie was unsustainable and they must answer the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2008 BCSC 1605
Parties
Plaintiff: Thomas E. Bronson; Plaintiff: J. Tom Bronson; Plaintiff: Lee B. Lewis; Plaintiff: Virginia C. 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
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Litigation Trusts, Fiduciary Duties and Property / Pre Trial Interlocutory Application Regarding Interrogatories During Ongoing Trial (trial Commenced November 3, 2008)
Outcome
Application granted
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Discovery, Scope of Discovery, Conflict of Interest, Trust Administration, Sale of Trust Assets, Costs
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Trust Law Fiduciary Duties Property Law Equity Interrogatories Discovery Scope of Discovery +4 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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas E. Bronson

Plaintiff

J. Tom Bronson

Plaintiff

Lee B. Lewis

Plaintiff

Virginia C. 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

Procedural Posture

Civil Litigation Trusts, Fiduciary Duties and Property / Pre Trial Interlocutory Application Regarding Interrogatories During Ongoing Trial (trial Commenced November 3, 2008)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interrogatories under Rule 29(1) must relate to matters in issue between the interrogating party and the addressee or may relate to any matter in question in the action generally
  2. 2 Whether Rule 29(1) should be interpreted consistently with Rule 27(22) governing examinations for discovery
  3. 3 Whether the specific objections by Jennifer Lewis Browning and Julie Anne Lewis to answering interrogatories were sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

Rule 29(1) must be interpreted consistently with Rule 27(22); interrogatories may require answers on any matter in question in the action generally even if not an issue between the plaintiffs and the particular addressees, therefore the objection by Jennifer and Julie was unsustainable and they must answer the interrogatories.

Court Disposition

Application granted

Orders

  • Defendants Jennifer Lewis Browning and Julie Anne Lewis are ordered to deliver answers to the interrogatories by December 2, 2008.
  • Costs of this application to the plaintiffs against Jennifer Lewis Browning and Julie Anne Lewis in any event of the cause.