Ottawa Divorce .com Forums

Ottawa Divorce .com Forums (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/)
-   Divorce & Family Law (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f3/)
-   -   My time was cut short (http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f3/my-time-cut-short-21234/)

Aghast 07-28-2017 02:19 AM

My time was cut short
 
Has anyone experienced this or know what to do about it?

I had a Motion scheduled for a couple of hours. The docket was full and other shorter Motions went ahead of us. The first part of the Motion (my Motion) well but then after the other side argued their Motion (he talked so slow), we were running out of time. It was my turn afterward to rebut his Motion. The Judge said that I only had a short amount of time because Court rose at that time. The other lawyer made all his submissions and I had to rush through mine, trying to skip around and hit on the important points but I missed some points.

The Motion was scheduled for 4 hours and we got about 3 hours. The other lawyer argued his whole motion and I didn't get a chance to argue against if effectively because of the time crunch.

I didn't mind the Judge, he was reasonable, patient and as accommodating as he could be. I am sure that he will make a fair decision based on what her heard but I didn't get a chance to point out all the discrepancies in the other sides case.

Anyone here get cut short? What did you do? It doesn't seem fair that the other side presented their whole case and I didn't get the same amount of time

trinton 07-28-2017 09:57 AM

If it doesn't go in your favour then you order the transcripts, file an appeal, and ask for a new motion given that the judge rushed you and only allowed 3 hours for a 4 hour motion. You should also then report the judge to the judicial council after your case is finished - not before as it may make the judge biased against you.

OrleansLawyer 07-28-2017 01:28 PM

Quote:

You should also then report the judge to the judicial council after your case is finished - not before as it may make the judge biased against you.
Part of the judge's duty is to run their court room. It is within their power to limit how long parties have to make submissions. Triton is offering poor advice.

Quote:

get cut short? What did you do?
If your time was limited before the motion started (for example, you are starting at 2:00 p.m. for a 4 hour motion, you know that you only have 3 hours) - then a prudent idea would be to address it with the judge, perhaps suggesting that moving party argues for no more than 80 minutes, responding party for 80 minutes, and right of reply for 10 minutes at most (with a 10 minute recess rounding out the afternoon).

As a second option, if you run out of time but have not finished your submissions, you can ask that the motion continue another day (if you are lucky, the next morning; otherwise, later). The judge can grant this, or refuse it.

As a final point, you will have submitted a factum because of the length of your motion. The judge will have seen that you were doing a speed run. He is going to go through your material, which is just as effective as making submissions. More often than not, the decision is made based on the materials rather than submissions.

arabian 07-28-2017 04:30 PM

Agree with OrleansLawyer

Judge's are the boss in the courtroom.
Keep in mind that your situation is not unique and judge has handled similar situations many times.

Hopefully your submission was concise and didn't ramble on an on with repetitive stuff.

Boring a judge can be the kiss of death.

trinton 08-01-2017 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer (Post 222481)
Part of the judge's duty is to run their court room. It is within their power to limit how long parties have to make submissions. Triton is offering poor advice.


Telling you that you have 2 hours and cutting you off abruptly right on the clock like a robot is one thing and telling you that you have 2 hours then allowing other side to rant on for 3 hours and giving you only one hour and cutting you off abruptly is another thing. If the judge is limiting the parties then both parties should be cut off at their 2 hour time to not take time away from the other party. Definitely warrants a complaint and if enough citizens have that same issue with that particular judge then perhaps the judge needs to review their mandates and ensure they are not abusing their powers to the determinant of the parties, and quite possibly the best interests of the child.

I've been before a judge that initially told me too late I had my chance already when i mentioned I had something else to say following conclusion of my oral submission. But then I gave off the body language that I had somethimg very important to say and that I was saddened and shpuld maybe report the judge to the judical council and just sat there quietly and the judge turned to me very politely and asked me to go ahead and say what I had to say and listened to it and thanked me for sharing it with her. I have tons of respect for that particular judge.

Just remember that judges are supposed to permit you to speak and listen to you when you speak. They also mandated to be professional and treat you with respect.

trinton 08-01-2017 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arabian (Post 222494)
Judge's are the boss in the courtroom.

Yes, but they don't get to break laws just because they are a judge.


Quote:

Originally Posted by arabian (Post 222494)
Keep in mind that your situation is not unique and judge has handled similar situations many times.

It's the way it was handles that makes the issue unique. Did judge allow both parties they time they were granted or take an hour from one party and give it to the other to a party's determinant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arabian (Post 222494)
Hopefully your submission was concise and didn't ramble on an on with repetitive stuff.

Doesn't matter. A judge has to let you speak and listen to you when you speak. If they have any questions they could ask but generally this will allow opportunity for an appeal on the basis of bias as only the other party/ lawyer shoupd ask questions. If their questions are in relation yo driving the trial to relevant arguments then that is different.

Boring a judge can be the kiss of death.

Quote:

Originally Posted by arabian (Post 222494)


Boring a judge can be the kiss of death.

I didnt realize parties were in court to entertain the judge , or the boss, as you like to refer to them. I would also sure hope that your very own relationship with your boss is one that of a 2 way street.

trinton 08-01-2017 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer (Post 222481)
As a final point, you will have submitted a factum because of the length of your motion. The judge will have seen that you were doing a speed run. He is going to go through your material, which is just as effective as making submissions. More often than not, the decision is made based on the materials rather than submissions.


That is a very good point and argument but 70 % (Don't recall exact value) of what you are trying to communicate is communicated through your body language and tone of voice.

arabian 08-01-2017 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trinton (Post 222565)
Yes, but they don't get to break laws just because they are a judge.




It's the way it was handles that makes the issue unique. Did judge allow both parties they time they were granted or take an hour from one party and give it to the other to a party's determinant.



Doesn't matter. A judge has to let you speak and listen to you when you speak. If they have any questions they could ask but generally this will allow opportunity for an appeal on the basis of bias as only the other party/ lawyer shoupd ask questions. If their questions are in relation yo driving the trial to relevant arguments then that is different.

Boring a judge can be the kiss of death.



I didnt realize parties were in court to entertain the judge , or the boss, as you like to refer to them. I would also sure hope that your very own relationship with your boss is one that of a 2 way street.

Ex has taken me to court 8+times - unsuccessfully. My opinion is based on observations of errors my ex made.

Judges are very busy with MANY files. They are acutely aware of time constraints and, in fairness to other people who have matters to be decided, they have to curtail nonsensical, time-consuming, repetitive arguments by high-conflict litigants (something they are quite adept at I might add).
I speak with my boss 1 - 2 times/year. I work and he pays me. Yes, it is a two-way street.... not sure what my boss has to do with this LOL.

trinton 08-01-2017 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arabian (Post 222568)
Ex has taken me to court 8+times - unsuccessfully. My opinion is based on observations of ..

Judges are very busy with MANY files. They are acutely aware of time constraints and, in fairness to other people who have matters to be decided, they have to curtail nonsensical, time-consuming, repetitive arguments by high-conflict litigants (something they are quite adept at I might add).


I speak with my boss 1 - 2 times/year. I work and he pays me. Yes, it is a two-way street.... not sure what my boss has to do with this LOL.

Your boss doesn't have much to do with it. You're the one that brought up the word boss and related the word boss to a judge. I was quite frankly comparing the scenario to a nornal relationship that you wouod have with a boss. However, in your case and apparantly with your preception of a boss, it seems he/she just tells you what to do and you do it. Desn't sound like you are actively involved in discussions about things and are just told what to do. Doesn't seem like a 2 way street at all. Why would i even be surprised an idiom about communications and accountability gets precieved that way and into the topic of money. At least I know what is your priority in life and brings in to question your motives to be on this site given you've been to court with your ex 8+ times, more likely than not, about money. Yes arabian.. everything in life is about money.

Anyway, Not everyone is your ex that makes irrelevant arguments. Doesn't seem that was the issue for OP, but instead judge granted the other party extra time not realizing they were taking time away from op, then had to rush op as judge failed to fairly manage his/her times. Yes it must be fair to other matters in court but it should also be fair to the parties of each matter.

arabian 08-01-2017 09:43 PM

Wah wah wah.

I will repeat - judge is the "boss" of the courtroom and he/she alone decides what is "fair" and "not fair."

My boss is highly-regarded in his field/medical expertise (one of 14 in Canada). He employs people who do not require hand-holding and who can make decisions independently.

Questioning my "motives for being on this site" ??? I simply believe in giving back some of the valuable experience I have gained through the 7 years I spent in litigation with my ex. Of course Family Court revolves around money. In your situation access = money does it not?

So you think a judge is unfair? Tough titty. You have to take the good with the bad. Unless a judge errors in law you have absolutely no recourse. Crying and babbling over how unfair one thinks a judge is will get you nowhere. Option is to do what many people do is put big money on the table and hire a lawyer. Then you can spend $500.00+ an hour crying to the lawyer.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:55 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0