Bizon v O'Donnell, 2015 ABQB 816

Court of Queen ’ s Bench of Alberta Citation: Bizon v O'Donnell, 2015 ABQB 816 Date: 20151218 Docket: 1403 16484 Registry: Edmonton Between: Emil Bizon Plaintiff (Appellant) - and - Theresa O'Donnell Defendant _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Reasons for Decision on Leave of the Associate Chief Justice J.D. Rooke _______________________________________________________ [ 1 ] For reasons that emanate from a long and painful history of vexatious litigation, discussed in, inter alia , my decision in Bizon Estate (Re) , 2014 ABQB 783 , released December 19, 2014 (“December 2014 Decision”), relating to the surrogate action pertaining to

his late brother, Julian Bizon’s (“Deceased”), estate (Estate Action ES03-133355 – “Estate”), on June 19, 2015 (filed August 7, 2015), I issued an Order (“Vexatious Litigant Order”), with oral reasons at that time, declaring Emil Bizon (“Bizon”) a vexatious litigant and prohibiting him from taking any further action in any Alberta Court in respect of any matter relating to the Estate, without my leave. [ 2 ] Before my December 2014 Decision, Bizon commenced this action against his sister-in-law, Theresa O’Donnell (“O’Donnell”), for defamation relating to O’Donnell’s complaint to the RCMP that Bizon had, on November 14, 2012, illegally exhumed, or disinterred, the remains of the Deceased.

That allegation resulted in Bizon being charged under s. 73 of the Vital Statistics Act , SA c. V-4.1 on December 3, 2013, but he was acquitted of that charge before Provincial Court Judge Maher on October 26, 2014. As is clear from my December 2014 Decision and Master Smart’s Decision ( infra ), the accusation, the Provincial Court proceedings, and this action are very much matters relating to the Estate. [ 3 ] In an application herein returned in Masters’ Chambers on May 15, 2015, Counsel for O’Donnell sought

summary judgment against Bizon in this action. The application was argued that day, and, on September 28, 2015, Master Smart issued his decision in Bizon v. O’Donnell , 2015 ABQB 608 (“Master Smart’s Decision”), dismissing this action. [ 4 ] Notwithstanding the terms of the Vexatious Litigant Order, without seeking leave, as required by that Order, Bizon, on October 14, 2015, filed a Notice of Appeal from Master Smart’s Decision, and on October 22, 2015 filed his “Written Argument in support of appeal”.

That appeal was returned before Anderson J. of our Court on October 28, 2015, wherein she refused to hear it because it did not have my leave as required under the Vexations Litigant Order. [ 5 ] On November 7, 2015, without any apparent notice to Counsel for O’Donnell, Bizon wrote to me, seeking leave to pursue the appeal. Normally the right to appeal from an Order of a Master is an automatic right and no leave is necessary. However, this is not a normal case.

While I am not performing an appeal function in this leave application, I have reviewed Master Smart’s Decision, and the Bizon’s “Written Argument”, and the latter is merely a re-argument (one might say a “re-hashing”) of the same matter before me, in the Estate context, and Master Smart, in the defamation context, all relating to the Estate, and more specifically the disinterment of the Deceased’s remains. On the face of these documents, they do not demonstrate anything that would cause a Justice of our Court to interfere, in fact or in law, with Master Smart’s Decision.

Accordingly, in all the circumstances of the litigation relating to the Estate (including my oral reasons on June 9, 2015 for the Vexatious Litigant Order), and the within action, I find denial of leave to prosecute an appeal is in the public interest in this case. While, again in normal cases, I would call a hearing to entertain any oral arguments on the application for leave, in this unusual case, I find that setting a hearing on this request for leave would only lead to further vexatious conduct and abusive of process by Bizon.

Accordingly, I issue these Reasons without further submissions than contained in his letter of November 7, 2015, which I will place on the Court’s file in this action. [ 6 ] Leave is denied. [ 7 ] I could trace the history of this vexatious abuse by Bizon of the proper litigation processes before our Court, but to do so would just be a further waste of the Court’s resources.

Suffice it to say, it is clear from reading my December 2014 Decision (and the decision of Justice Read referenced therein – 2012 ABQB 605 ), and numerous other decisions and reasons (written and oral) and orders in the Estate, that Bizon is obsessed with litigation arising out of the Deceased’s death, and the battle with his sister, as co-executor, and other family members, including O’Donnell (also involved in the Estate Action) in relation to the administration of the Estate, now concluded under my active case management.

The whole issue of the disinterment of the Deceased’s body and everything that resulted from it has remained a basis for litigation brought by Bizon since. In spite of the fact that Bizon argues in his letter that “[t]his case does not emanate from any matter relating to the estate”, I find that this action, and its appeal, is very much in relation to the Estate. His vexation litigation must be stopped and this denial of leave to pursue the appeal, which I so deny, will do that.

He must still seek leave from me, or my nominee, for any other step in any proceeding that has any relationship to the Estate. [ 8 ] If any costs have arisen to O’Donnell from this action that have not yet been ordered against Bizon, and she wishes to pursue them, she can make application to me on notice to Bizon. Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta this 18 th day of December 2015. J.D. Rooke A.C.J.C.Q.B.A. Party and Counsel: Emil Bizon

Self-Represented Raj S. Deol for the Defendant