Sealing off the court from the public eye – what is the risk v. benefit?

Sealing off the court from the public eye – what is the risk v. benefit?

The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Sherman Estate v. Donovan 2021 SCC 25 in June of 2021. This case concerns the unresolved homicide of Bernard and Honey Sherman, who were found dead in their Toronto home in December of 2017. The couple’s estate and estate trustees attempted to stem the intense press scrutiny prompted by the events. At issue was the probate of a million, if not the billion-dollar estate.

Defending an Action Without an Insured? When a Claim is Served Upon the Insurer by Substituted Service, Where the Rules and Practice Should, Could or Might Lead.

The issue of plaintiff’s counsel serving their statement of claim directly upon a defendant’s insurer, by way of an order for substituted service, has been around for some time.

The leading case on the issue is Laframboise v. Woodward (2002), 59 O.R. (3d) 338, 2002 CarswellOnt 1448 (Ont. S.C.J.)

It has no history. It does not have negative treatment. It has not been distinguished or overruled.

In the decision Justice Quinn decides to summarize the state of the law on the issue and make very pointed comments on the proper procedure to be followed in obtaining such an order.