2010 QCCQ 3617, 2010 QCCQ 3617

Palladini c. Padulo 2010 QCCQ 3617 COURT OF QUEBEC «Small Claims Division» CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-115730-097 DATE: April 26, 2010 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE DIANE QUENNEVILLE, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DANIEL PALLADINI […] Montréal (Québec) […] Plaintiff and Cross-Claim Defendant v.

CAROL PADULO […] Pierrefonds (Québec) […] Defendant and Cross-Claim Plaintiff And ANNE BELISLE […] Pierrefonds (Québec) […] SOCIÉTÉ IMMOBILIÈRE LAC ST-LOUIS (LANDLO RD) 14101 Anselme Lavigne Pierrefonds (Québec) H9A 1R4 and L'ASSOCIATION DES LOCATAIRES R.E.A.L. 14101 Anselme Lavigne Pierrefonds (Québec) H9A 1R4 Defendants ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Plaintiff Daniel Palladini claims from the Defendants $ 500.00 representing the value of an exercycle that he lost. [ 2 ] The Plaintiff states that, in the fall of 2006, his brother gave him an exercycle which the latter had bought in the spring of 2006. [ 3 ] Plaintiff put the exercycle in the games room of the residence where he and the Defendants Padulo and Belisle reside.

[ 4 ] In April or May 2007, he notices that the exercycle has disappeared. [ 5 ] Plaintiff is unable to provide to the Court the exact model or the value of his exercycle. But more importantly, the Plaintiff is unable to prove who was responsible for the disappearance of his exercycle. [ 6 ] Jean Salagan, responsible for the maintenance at the residence, states that three exercycles were left in a room with a note indicating they were broken. Mr. Salagan disposed of the exercycles.

The Court must assume that Plaintiff's exercycle was included in this lot. [ 7 ] Considering the lack of evidence supplied by the Plaintiff, the Court dismisses his claim. [ 8 ] Defendant Padulo filed a cross-claim of $ 500.00 representing the damages she says she suffered due to the slander by Plaintiff in numerous emails sent to her as president of R.E.A.L. Association, Exhibit D-2 en liasse.

The Court has reviewed these emails and cannot conclude that the Plaintiff made any slanderous remarks towards Defendant Padulo. [ 9 ] From the evidence provided, the Court has no hesitation to conclude that Plaintiff's claim as well as Defendant Padulo's cross-claim is a result of past or present positions occupied by the Plaintiff and Defendants Padulo and Belisle in R.E.A.L. Association and the decisions taken within. [ 10 ] This situation, as well as the acrimonious conduct of all the parties is unfortunate, as they all still reside in the same residence.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: DISMISSES Plaintiff's action; DISMISSES Defendant Carol Padulo's cross-claim; WITHOUT COSTS. __________________________________ DIANE QUENNEVILLE, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: April 20, 2010