Does the examination for discovery by a defendant constitute a step in an action?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from Edmonton Structures (1984) Ltd. v. Maier, 1999 ABQB 684 (CanLII):
In McCracken v. Alberta, 133 A.R. 73 at paragraph 21 McDonald J. said that the examination for discovery by the defendant of the plaintiff does not constitute a step in an action. In my view the examination for discovery by the defendant of the plaintiff is not a thing done in the action that materially advances the action.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Can a party to an action extend the action by unilateral action, when nothing has been done to materially advance the action for five years or more? (Alberta, Canada)
Can an examination for discovery be used as evidence against the party who conducted the examination? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a defendant defend using qualified privilege in a defamation action against a plaintiff who made a defamatory statement? (Alberta, Canada)
Does a co-defendant have to pay the costs of an unsuccessful defendant in a motor vehicle accident action? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a defendant who has put his physical condition in issue in an action by him for damages deny an independent medical examination? (Alberta, Canada)
Can events arising from a prior action be the foundation for a new action? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a call to testify for discovery or production of documents in the way of discovery? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the test for determining whether a delay in taking the action constitutes a bar? (Alberta, Canada)
What is the meaning of intent without corresponding action in a divorce action? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a foreign defendant be a necessary or proper party to an action? (Alberta, Canada)
