Klebaum v Luba
Zachary Brock Graham Klebaum
Law Firm / Organization
Self Represented
Dr. Luba
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Brodie
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Chong
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Wanson
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Roccomattisi
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Shokar
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Masood
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Gilecki
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Lau
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Short
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Jovana Miladinovic
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Dr. Pavlo Zerebecky
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Patrick Ennis
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Donovan Balas
Law Firm / Organization
Unrepresented
Kimberley Souza
Ronna Hilsendager

Overview:
A self-represented litigant, filed a $5 trillion lawsuit against 16 defendants, including medical professionals, mental health nurses, and lawyers. The claim stemmed from allegations of mistreatment under community treatment orders issued pursuant to Saskatchewan’s Mental Health Services Act.

Legal Arguments and Issues:
Kimberley Souza and Ronna Hilsendager, community mental health nurses, applied to strike the claim under Rule 7-9 of The King’s Bench Rules, arguing the statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action, was scandalous, frivolous, or vexatious, and constituted an abuse of process. The court determined that:

  • Souza and Hilsendager acted in good faith while executing duties under valid community treatment orders.
  • Their actions were protected by the statutory immunity clause in Section 39 of The Mental Health Services Act.
  • Allegations of “collusion,” “abuse of power,” and “harassment” were unsupported by facts.

The court also found the lawsuit frivolous and an abuse of process, noting that Klebaum had bypassed proper appeal channels provided by the Act.

Decision and Costs:
Justice M.L. Dovell struck the claim entirely against Souza and Hilsendager and awarded them fixed costs of $2,500, citing parity with similar motions in the case. The court emphasized the importance of protecting individuals performing lawful duties under statutory frameworks.

Conclusion:
The claim against Souza and Hilsendager was dismissed in its entirety for lacking merit, with costs awarded to the defendants.

Court of King's Bench for Saskatchewan
KBG-SA-00760-2024
Civil litigation
$ 2,500
Defendant