Feeney v TD General Insurance Company, 2021 ABQB 671

Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta Citation: Feeney v TD General Insurance Company, 2021 ABQB 671 Date: 20210823 Docket: 2101 02349 Registry: Calgary Between: Keenan A. Feeney Respondent / Plaintiff - and - TD General Insurance Company, TD Home and Auto Insurance Company, and Security National Insurance Company Applicants / Defendants - and - Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta, and Mike Ter Kuile Applicants, Judicature Act ss 23-23.1 _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of the Associate Chief Justice J.D. Rooke _______________________________________________________

[ 1 ] On July 26, 2021, Counsel for TD General Insurance Company, TD Home and Auto Insurance Company, and Security National Insurance Company [the Defendants], by letter to myself and Chief Justice Moreau, requested that the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Feeney v TD General Insurance Company Docket 2101 02349 lawsuit be placed into Case Management, and that a Case Management Justice be assigned to that matter. [ 2 ] I denied that Application in a decision reported as Feeney v TD General Insurance Company , 2021 ABQB 604 [ Feeney v TD #1 ].

Following review of the Case Management request and its supporting materials, and in light of the litigation record of the Plaintiff, Keenan Feeney [Mr. Feeney], I concluded that Case Management of Mr. Keeney before the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench is futile and hopeless. The Court has already decided that point: Feeney v Simon , 2021 ABQB 169 at para 17 . The Alberta Court of Appeal, at least implicitly, has reached the same conclusion in relation to Mr. Feeney’s conduct before that Court. The Alberta Court of Appeal imposed Judicature Act , RSA 2000, c J-2 ss 23-23.1 court access restrictions on Mr.

Feeney on July 12, 2021: Feeney v Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of Alberta , 2021 ABCA 255 . [ 3 ] Given Mr. Feeney’s record, prior decisions of this Court, and findings of fact and law made by the Alberta Court of Appeal, in Feeney v TD #1 , I: 1. requested that the Defendants initiate a Judicature Act , ss 23-23.1 application against Mr. Feeney, with that Application having a deadline of August 20, 2021 ( Feeney v TD #1 at para 14 ), and 2. imposed interim court access restrictions on Mr.

Feeney that would extend until the latter of September 30, 2021, or the completion of the requested Judicature Act , ss 23.23.1 process ( Feeney v TD #1 at paras 7-9, 15 ). [ 4 ] On August 20, 2021, I received two Applications that Mr. Feeney be subject to court access restrictions pursuant to Judicature Act , ss 23-23.1, from: 1) the Defendants; and 2) Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta [Alberta] and Mike Ter Kuile [Mr. Ter Kuile]. Alberta and Mr. Ter Kuile were the successful Applicants in Feeney v Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of Alberta , 2021 ABCA 255 .

Alberta participates in this matter as of right: Judicature Act s 23.1(2). I conclude Mr. Ter Kuile is a proper co- applicant via Judicature Act s 23.1(2), given Mr. Ter Kuile’s participation in the Alberta Court of Appeal, and Justice Khullar’s reasoning and findings in Feeney v Her Majesty the Queen in the Right of Alberta , 2021 ABCA 255. [ 5 ] The Applicants seek court access restrictions that prohibit Mr.

Feeney from initiating or continuing litigation in the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, and that these Applications proceed on the basis of written materials only. [ 6 ] The two critical issues for these Applications are: 1. should Mr.

Feeney be subject to court access restriction gatekeeping as a “vexatious litigant”, pursuant to Judicature Act , ss 23- 23.1, and 2. if so, what should be the scope of those court access restrictions? [ 7 ] I therefore direct that the Applications will proceed as follows on a document-only basis: 1. the Applicants have until September 10, 2021 to file and serve written argument and supporting affidavit evidence, 2. Mr.

Feeney has until September 24, 2021 to file and serve written argument and supporting affidavit evidence, and 3. the Applicants may file rebuttal argument, due October 1, 2021. [ 8 ] After completion of these steps, the Court will render its decision in writing. For clarity, the “Interim Court Access Restrictions” Order of July 30, 2021 in this Action will continue until the Court issues a decision in response to the Application of the Defendants and the Application of Alberta and Mr. Ter Kuile. [ 9 ] Counsel for the Defendants will prepare and serve the Order giving effect to this Decision. Mr.

Feeney’s approval of that Order is waived pursuant to Rule 9.4(2)(c). Mr. Feeney shall be served this Decision and the corresponding Order to his email address: keenan.feeney@gmail.com. Dated at the City of Calgary, Alberta this 23 rd day of August, 2021. J.D. Rooke A.C.J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances:

Desiree Winters Whitelaw Twining LLP for the Defendants TD General Insurance Company, TD Home and Auto Insurance Company, and Security National Insurance Company Cynthia Hykaway and Tim Dooley Alberta Justice and Solicitor General for the Applicant Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Alberta Colleen Sinclair, The City of Calgary - Law, Legal Services for the Applicant Mike Ter Kuile