Court File No.

11-0230

ONTA RIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

BETWEEN: LAURIE MASSICOTTE, SHAUNA FRASER, JENNA FRASER and RACHELLE FRASER

Plaintiffs and
MARY ELIZABETH HARRIMAN, DAVID RUSSELL WILLIAMS and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN IN RIGHT OF ONTARIO Defendants

NOTICE OF MOTION
The Defendant, Mary Elizabeth Harriman, will make a Motion to the
court

on

February 20, 2014 at 10:00 a.m., or as soon after that time as the Motion can be heard at the court house, 21 Court Street, Kingston, Ontario.
PROPOSED METHOD OF HEARING: The Motion is to be heard (choose appropriate

option)

[ J

in

writing under subrule 37.12.1(1) because it

is

(insert one of on consent,

unopposed or made without notice);

[ J
[XJ

in writing as an

opposed motion under subrule 37.12.1(4);

orally.

-2-

THE MOTION IS FOR (State here the precise relief sought) (a) Should the plaintiffs motion (being heard concurrently with this motion) to amend the Statement of Claim be granted, an Order striking portions of the Statement of Claim as being frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of process; (b) An Order granting the defendant, Mary Elizabeth Harriman, her costs of this motion on a full indemnity basis, payable forthwith; and, (c) Such further and other Relief as to this Honourable Court may seem just.

THE GROUNDS FOR THE MOTION ARE (Specify the grounds to be argued, including a

reference to any statutory provision or rule to be relied on) (a) (b) Rule 25.11 of the Rules of Civil Procedure The plaintiff, Laurie Massicotte, seeks to amend her Statement of Claim to assert that, among other claims, the defendant, Mary Eliza berth Harriman, had knowledge of the crimes perpetrated by her former husband, David Russell Williams.
(C)

The plaintiff has provided no evidence whatsoever to support this allegation. This allegation provides no probative value to the amended pleading and exists for the purpose of diminishing the defendant, Mary Elizabeth Harriman, in the eyes of the Court.

(d)

-3(e) This allegation is wholly irrelevant to the conduct of this proceeding and should be struck as scandalous and vexatious. (f) Such further and other grounds as the lawyers may advise,

THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE will be used at the hearing of the

Motion: (List the affidavits or other documentary evidence to be relied on) (a) The Pleadings, and proposed Amended Pleadings, exchanged in this proceeding; (b) (c) The Affidavit of Michael D. Heikkinen, sworn January 30, 2014; Such further and other evidence as the lawyers may advise and this Honourable Court may permit.

January 30, 2014

AUGUSTINE BATER BINKS LLP 141 Laurier Avenue West Suite 1100 Ottawa ON K1P 533 Mary Jane Binks, Q.C. LSUC# 12584H Tel: 613-569-9500 ext. 116 Fax: 613-569-9522

Lawyers for the Defendant, Mary Elizabeth Harriman

RCPE 37A (July 1, 2007)

LAURIE MASSICOTTE et al. Plaintiffs and DAVID RUSSELL WILLIAMS et al. Defendants Court File #: 11-230 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE Proceeding Commenced at BELLEVILLE

Ontario

NOTICE OF MOTION

AUGUSTINE BIN KS LLP 141 Laurier Avenue West Suite 1100 Ottawa ON K1P 533 BOX 126 Mary Jane Binks, Q.C. LSUC# 12584H Tel: 613-569-9500 ext. 129 Fax: 613-569-9522

Lawyers for the Defendant, Mary Elizabeth Harriman