Cushing et al. v. Hood, 2008 NSCA 47

• Jurisdiction: Nova Scotia
• Judge: MacDonald, C.J.N.S., Bateman and Cromwell, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Nova Scotia (Canada)
• Citation: 2008 NSCA 47,(2008), 266 N.S.R.(2d) 179 (CA)
• Date: 20 May 2008

Cushing v. Hood (2008), 266 N.S.R.(2d) 179 (CA);

    851 A.P.R. 179

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2008] N.S.R.(2d) TBEd. MY.037

Wendy Cushing, Future Group Realty Limited and Russell Cushing (appellants) v. S. Clifford Hood (respondent)

(CA 282489; 2008 NSCA 47)

Indexed As: Cushing et al. v. Hood

Nova Scotia Court of Appeal

MacDonald, C.J.N.S., Bateman and Cromwell, JJ.A.

May 20, 2008.

Summary:

The plaintiffs sued the defendant, alleging a breach of solicitor-client privilege and sought an injunction and punitive damages.

The Nova Scotia Supreme Court dismissed the action. The plaintiffs appealed.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Barristers and Solicitors - Topic 1504

Relationship with client - Solicitor-client relationship - What constitutes - Cushing was a legal associate of Hood - Cushing's wife was contemplating leaving her employment as a real estate broker - Cushing and Hood had a conversation about whether his wife should give notice, both agreeing that she should - Since Cushing's wife was apparently not inclined to listen to her husband, when his wife was in his office Cushing asked Hood to come in and repeat the conversation the two had had previously regarding the notice issue - Thereafter, Cushing left her job without notice and was sued by the real estate firm - Subsequently, Hood discussed the general nature of his conversation with the Cushings with the owner of the real estate firm and her lawyer - The Cushings sued Hood for breach of solicitor-client privilege and sought an injunction and punitive damages - The trial judge dismissed the action, holding that a solicitor-client relationship had not been established - The Cushings appealed - The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, where there was no palpable or overriding error on the part of the trial judge.

Cases Noticed:

Descoteaux et al. v. Mierzwinski et al., [1982] 1 S.C.R. 860; 44 N.R. 462, refd to. [para. 4].

Counsel:

Rubin Dexter, for the appellants;

S. Bruce Outhouse, Q.C. and Adrienne Bowers, for the respondent.

This appeal was heard in Halifax, Nova Scotia, on May 20, 2008, before MacDonald, C.J.N.S., Bateman and Cromwell, JJ.A., of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. The following decision was delivered orally for the court by Cromwell, J.A., on May 20, 2008, with the written reasons released on May 21, 2008.