Suite 3150, 100 Wellington St West, Toronto, Ontario, M5K 1A1
We serve clients in the fields of business law, litigation and estates. Our strength is high quality personal service. We are accessible, efficient and plain spoken.

We have excellent relationships with a number of national law firms, who refer clients to us for our special brand of service or when conflicts arise. We also work closely with a number of leading boutique firms in the fields of tax, intellectual property, employment law and family law. It is a source of great pride to us that other lawyers value our advice and assistance.
Our success is built upon lasting relationships with our clients and their advisors, based on skill, integrity and discretion.
In acting for closely-held or family businesses, we understand that the affairs of the business are closely connected to the personal affairs of its principals. Our focus on long term relationships with our clients enables us to see the whole picture and serve their wealth management needs in a meaningful way.

We have found that our skills and our approach to the practice of law are especially well-suited to succession planning, where the work we do may involve a broad range of matters including: shareholder, partnership and co-owner agreements; governance; the transition of management; the transfer of ownership; wills; trusts; marriage contracts; insurance matters; the implementation of estate freeze transactions; and the implementation of post-mortem planning.
In this part of our practice, we advise and represent clients in the following matters:
•  wills and trusts
•  planning for incapacity
•  planning for succession of the closely-held business
•  planning for succession of the family business
•  the administration of estates
Disputes are part of life. We give our clients a candid and realistic assessment of the situation. We work with our clients to develop an effective strategy to resolve the dispute.

Litigation can be difficult and time consuming. Often settlements provide more favourable outcomes. We position our clients to bargain from their position of maximum strength. We are skilled and determined negotiators.

Sometimes an acceptable settlement is not possible and the best strategy is to proceed to trial. In that case, we provide vigorous courtroom representation. We have a track record of courtroom success.
The disputes we resolve include:
•  breach of contract claims
•  wrongful dismissal actions
•  professional negligence claims
•  insurance coverage issues
•  shareholder oppression claims
  
•  partnership disagreements
•  human rights issues
•  estate matters
  
We are committed to:
•  delivering quality, timely personal service
•  developing strong and lasting relationships with our clients by investing the time to     understand their business and personal affairs
•  using our experience, skill and relationships to achieve the best results for our clients
•  providing our legal advice in an efficient, understandable and practical manner
We handle a wide variety of referral work and provide independent counsel. In doing so, we respect completely a client’s relationship with the firm that has made the referral.
Our clients expect, and we provide, quality and sophisticated legal service.
Steve is the trusted lawyer and advisor for a select group of business owners, executives and their families. Drawing on his diverse knowledge of corporate law, commercial law, real estate, wills and trusts, Steve carries on a successful business law practice and works extensively in the field of wealth management, estates and succession planning.

Clients value Steve’s discretion and constructive approach to getting things done. They recognize his affinity for the “people” side of the practice of law and appreciate that he really cares.

Steve’s work comes mainly on referral from other lawyers and, increasingly, involves planning and problem solving in complex business and family situations. He is often consulted for second opinions and a different perspective.

Steve began to practice in 1982, after obtaining his first law degree at the University of Western Ontario and a graduate degree at the University of Cambridge.
John is a seasoned litigation lawyer. He takes pride in being accessible, responsive and forthright. He is able to clearly analyze a problem, design an effective strategy and proceed to a successful conclusion.

John has extensive courtroom experience. He is calm, determined and fearless. His clients sometimes remark that he wants to win more than they do. A selection of John’s reported cases appears below.

John has broad experience with commercial issues, employment matters, professional negligence claims, insurance coverage issues, vendor/purchaser disputes, shareholder/partnership issues and human rights complaints.

John’s work comes from referrals from previous clients and other lawyers. He also acts for a group of long standing clients who appreciate his determined and personal attention to their needs.

John began to practice in 1980 after obtaining his law degree at the University of Western Ontario. John practiced at WeirFoulds LLP from 1980 to 2011.
Baiden et al v. Canadian Universities Reciprocal Insurance Exchange, 2011 ONSC 7374 (Ont. Sup. Ct.). An insurer was ordered to defend a university professor in a claim by a disgruntled student.
Love v. Acuity Investment Management Inc. (2009), 74 C.C.E.L. (3d) 272 (Ont. Sup. Ct.); 75 C.C.E.L. (3d) 287 (Ont. Sup. Ct.); 2011 ONCA 130. A dismissed executive's $15.5M claim was assessed at trial at $528,000 and reduced to $131,000 on appeal. He ended up recovering nothing and having to pay $138,000 in costs to his former employer.
Woodbury v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. (2010), 88 C.C.L.I. (4th) 261 (Ont. Sup. Ct.). A homeowner's insurance policy did not cover a boating accident.
Homelife Realty Services Inc. v. Homelife Performance Realty Inc. (2007), 64 R.P.R. (4th) 102 (Ont. Sup. Ct.). Claims by a real estate franchisee for inducing breach of contract and other economic torts were dismissed.
4345142 Ontario Inc. v. InStorage Ltd. Partnership (2008), 72 R.P.R. (4th) 102 (Ont. Sup. Ct.). A claim to an equitable lien arising out of an earn-out agreement was dismissed.
Taggart v. Canada Life Assurance Co. (2005), 40 C.C.E.L. (3d) 312; (2006) 50 C.C.P.B. 163. A dismissed executive recovered his pension losses.
North York General Hospital Foundation v. Armstrong et al. (2004), 34 R.P.R. (4th) 173, 258 D.L.R. (4th) 85. A landlord was prevented from terminating long-term leases in a land lease community.
Murphy v. Alexander (2004), 236 D.L.R. (4th) 302. A defamed real estate agent was awarded modest damages.
Allen v. Bosley Real Estate Ltd. (2003), 27 C.C.E.L. (3d) 183. An employer did not have cause to dismiss an employee.
David Cooper Investments Ltd. v. Bermuda Tavern Ltd. et al. (2001), 56 O.R. (3d) 243. The sale of a business between family members was upheld.
King v. Giffels Holdings Inc. (1999), 46 O.R. (3d) 17. Summary judgment was denied when it would have thwarted the damage assessment by a jury.
Re Weinstein and Litigation Guardian of Weinstein (1997), 35 O.R. (3d) 229. An unconscionable gift/settlement by a mental incompetent was set aside.
Correa v. Dow Jones Markets Canada Inc. (1997), 35 O.R. (3d) 126. Summary judgment was granted in favour of a dismissed employee.
Royal Bank of Canada v. Chongsim Investments Ltd. et al. (1997), 32 O.R. (3d) 565. A bank was prevented from calling a perpetual operating line of credit.
Las Vegas Strip Ltd. v. Toronto (City) (1996), 30 O.R. (3d) 286; (1997), 99 O.A.C. 67. Duplicative claims were dismissed because of issue estoppel and res judicata.
Wilkie v. Economical Mutual Insurance Company (1996), 31 O.R. (3d) 489. A passenger who allegedly caused an accident was entitled to a defence from the driver's insurer.
Litowitz et al. v. Royal Trust Corporation of Canada (1995) 24 O.R. (3d) 607; (1996), 30 O.R. (3d) 579 A property owner was able to accelerate payment of a commercial mortgage because of violations of the Interest Act.
Fragopoulos v. Longview Solutions Inc., 2012 ONSC 1240.

 A wrongfully dismissed employee was granted summary judgment.

Foss v. Foss, 2013 ONSC 1345.

A confidentiality Order was refused.

Jevco Insurance Company v. Vishal Malaviya (2013), 114 O.R. (3d) 141.

An insurer was ordered to defend a motor vehicle claim despite paying its limits.

Pixiu Solutions Inc. v. Canadian General Tower Limited, 2014 ONSC 97.

A vinyl recycler recovered damages for breaches of a supply agreement.

Janik v. Stillman, 2016 ONSC 1801.

A negligence claim was dismissed against a lawyer based on admissions in pleadings.

Lash v. Lash Point Association Corp., 2016 ONSC 6563.

Family shareholders in a non- profit company that owned a cottage compound were ordered to be bought out.

Butera v. Chown, Cairns LLP, 2017 ONCA 783.

Partial Summary Judgment was not appropriate.

Ferguson v. Halton, 2018 ONSC 5675.

The limitation period for making a disability claim was not missed.

Formosa et al v. Persuad et al, 2019 ONSC 4860.

A lawyer was not negligent in his handling of an injunction motion.

Jogia v. RE/MAX Ontario et al, 2020 ONSC 733.

A franchisor and its principals were not vicariously liable for the actions of a franchisee.

Waters v. Furlong, 2020 ONSC 1065.

Security for costs ordered for an out of province plaintiff.

Cass and Campbell Professional Corporation
Suite 3150, P.O. Box 11
Canadian Pacific Tower,
Toronto-Dominion Centre
100 Wellington Street West
Toronto, Ontario
M5K 1A1
Phone:  416-849-8003
Fax:  416-849-8004
Steve Cass
Phone:  416-849-8006
E-mail: scass@casscampbell.com

John Campbell
Phone:  416-849-8005
E-mail: jcampbell@casscampbell.com