Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Divorce & Family Law

Divorce & Family Law This forum is for discussing any of the legal issues involved in your divorce.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 08-01-2017, 10:54 PM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,924
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

I would also add that Orleans Lawyer is, in fact, a real lawyer. He has offered his sage advice.

Written submissions/factums are extremely important. Too often, however, people make the mistake of not submitting concise documents and can also ramble on and on with irrelevant and yes, very boring, information.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 12:25 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
Wah wah wah.
Yes. Wah wah wah. Why are you crying ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
I will repeat - judge is the "boss" of the courtroom and he/she alone decides what is "fair" and "not fair."
Yes, they have that right. But if you don't agree with their decision, then you have rights too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
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.
I was right then. The relationship with your boss is a "one-way" street. He tells you what to do, and you just do it. No feedback or insight into processes or discussions about ongoing improvements. I am not quite convinced that you work for Einstein here, but rather for Mr. Tim Hortons, Mr. McDonalds, or Jordan's roofing factory.


Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
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 what you have learned in the 7 years of your spousal support battle is that Family Court revolves around money. I wonder why. Everybody only ever goes to court because of money and never because of their children right ? I would have thought that in those 7 years you have would learned that access and money are separate issues. But I suppose when your life revolves around money then everybody who ever goes to family court goes there for money and not for their children. Quite a skewed perception actually. But I don't blame you, I really don't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
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.
Actually, you don't need to cry to anybody. You could (and are encouraged ) to file a complaint with the Judical council (you have that right). Not sure if you have that right when it comes to your "boss" based on the information you have shared here however. We do however have that right when it comes to our "judges". You also can file an appeal if there is reasonable apprehension of bias. You don't need a $500 + an hour lawyer for either of that. Again, I am not sure what exactly you have learned in those 7 years other that Judges are always right and gods and that people go to court just because of money and never because of their children.

Last edited by trinton; 08-02-2017 at 12:46 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 12:44 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 1,681
trinton has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by arabian View Post
I would also add that Orleans Lawyer is, in fact, a real lawyer. He has offered his sage advice.

Written submissions/factums are extremely important. Too often, however, people make the mistake of not submitting concise documents and can also ramble on and on with irrelevant and yes, very boring, information.
How is he in fact a lawyer? Where is the evidence ? How did you form that so called fact? Regardless, lawyers and judges are always right and paralegals and self represented litigants are always wrong, right?

Yes, factums are important indeed. But so are oral arguments made in court based on any questions or other arguments or allegations/statements that may come up during the motion. Otherwise, then why do we even attend and speak and why not just email our factum to the judge to read and make a decision? Why do we conduct job interviews in person / phone and why not just make a decision merely based on the resumes / written material ?

And I am sure judges may often hear the same things over and over and over again, and find them boring, and would rather hear something they haven't heard before. But that doesn't give them any right to cut people off during their submissions because the judge failed to properly manage the motion and conduct it fairly, i.e., shortening the motion by one hour and giving one party the majority of the time to speak realizing the other side won't have enough time to speak. They have a duty to listen to you and hear what you have to say. Again, I don't see any indication from OP that they were ranting on and on about irrelevant information. Actually, based on a previous post of yours in another thread, you had mentioned that we presume what posters say to be true, and give advise based on that. But as stated, I am not surprised due to your perceptions that lawyers and judges are always right, and that people who don't get time to finish their submissions are being irrelevant, and that people who go to court are going their because of money.

Last edited by trinton; 08-02-2017 at 12:50 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 01:33 AM
arabian's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 9,924
arabian will become famous soon enough
Default

Trinton - Presuming to know anything of my professional relationship with my employer is quite funny.

Not many people on this forum have actually made it as far as trial. We are fortunate that OrleansLawyer (yes he is a real lawyer with experience in Family Law) will pop in now and then and offer advice. If you want assurance about his credentials then perhaps you should PM the owner of the site.

Re-read OrleansLawyer's post. Memorize it and ..... get over yourself.

You gave incorrect advice to the poster on this thread and OrleansLawyer politely corrected you.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:11 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,692
OrleansLawyer is a jewel in the roughOrleansLawyer is a jewel in the roughOrleansLawyer is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
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.
Since that is not the situation described by the OP your analogy is irrelevant.

Quote:
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.
Based on your description, the judge's line of thought was "this person will be more satisfied with the result if they are able to whinge on right now instead of feeling justice was not served later. Thus I will bend the rules for them". The judge used their discretion to allow you to make additional submissions. They were not obliged to do so.

Quote:
Just remember that judges are supposed to permit you to speak and listen to you when you speak.
There are rules. Parties, whether represented or not, are expected to follow them. Being a litigant does not grant you an audience for an indefinite period of time. Judges can, and are expected to, set time limits for matters.

Quote:
they don't get to break laws just because they are a judge.
No laws were broken.

Quote:
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.
Litigation is about persuasion. If you are meandering on then the judge is unlikely to follow your arguments; therefore you will not be persuasive. The judge is present to make a decision based on the facts and law, not hold your hand as you vent about how unfair life can be.

Quote:
cut people off during their submissions because the judge failed to properly manage the motion and conduct it fairly, i.e., shortening the motion by one hour and giving one party the majority of the time to speak realizing the other side won't have enough time to speak.
Reading comprehension - the OP did not say they received half of the time. They argued their motion, other side responded and argued a cross motion, their responding submissions to the cross motion were truncated.

Perhaps they went long with their initial motion, or the judge had heard enough information, or they ought to have included more in their initial motion? You are assuming information not given.

Quote:
Orleans Lawyer is, in fact, a real lawyer.
DISCLAIMER:
Everything said in this, and any other, message is not intended to be taken as legal advice. I do not hold myself out to be a lawyer, adult or literate. Any resemblance this or any other message may have to legal advice or common sense is entirely coincidental. This message was generated through the combination of a monkey hitting a keyboard with a rock and advanced spell check software.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 10:24 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,976
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Its also important to remember the bottom line that judges use facts and evidence. They dont care what happened three years ago on the anniversary of the time a bird flew by your house. They want the facts. You have x instances where you were denied access and the dates are in the attached chart. Your income was x dollars equaling x child support but you paid more or less and the total owing is y.

As OL said, there is a set way of operating in court and lawyer go to school for several years and then "apprentice" under another lawyer to learn these rules. Good lawyers have experience and follow the rules. Many self reps are buoyed by emotion and upset over the situation. You have to set emotion aside and go on fact. If you have good facts and good evidence it should be in your materials (short and sweet) and you speak to that. Unless your case is complex (see WorkingDad), you should be able to meet the timelines the court sets out.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 08-02-2017, 02:48 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 72
Aghast is on a distinguished road
Default

The Judge reserved his decision so I was wondering if there was anything I should do before the decision is made.


I would like to take this opportunity to give some advice that I have learned from this. Read these 2 articles:

1. Forget the Wind-Up and Make the Pitch: Some Suggestions for Writing More Persuasive Factums

2. Strategic Legal Writing: Preparing Persuasive Documents

Print these off and read them more than once. Even if you are not writing a Factum, the ideas can be translated into oral argument.

OrleansLawyer mentioned the Factum, and these articles mention that too many lawyers write bare Factums and rely on oral argument, which is wrong. I took the article's advice. My Factum was basically my argument. After re-reading my Factum, my basic argument is clear.

There are a few things that I wanted to add in my oral argument that came to me after my Factum was filed and that is what I missed with the time cut short, but the main problem was that I had my argument organized and the short time caused me to have to jump around and resulted in some of my argument getting confusing, and me getting flustered.

My advice is to read the above articles and follow their advice throughout. Not just if you write a Factum but in your Affidavits, oral arguments, Briefs...

Make your story clear in all of your submissions.

Affidavits are evidence in Motions so if something in the other party's affidavit is wrong, you need to point it out or at least state that you disagree, don't let anything slip by even if it sounds minor to you, because you may not be able to correct it during the Motion and the question will be "Why didn't you say something in your responding Affidavit"

If the other party's cross responding Affidavit (is that a term?) brings up new issues; respond to them. Even if it is past the deadline. File it late or have it commissioned and bring it to court with you (bring 3 copies, or more if there are more parties that need to be served) and explain to the Judge that you are responding to new issues brought up after your deadline. Don't add anything new, just respond to the new issues.

I had to do this and it saved my ass. The Judge allowed it and had already read it. The other side has a lawyer so I don't know why the lawyer allowed the new arguments to be submitted in that final Affidavit, but it worked against them.

The Judge I had was not a Family Court Judge so I don't know if my experience will have been different than if I had a regular Family Court Judge.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Access - Where to go from here? DGES Divorce & Family Law 10 12-12-2016 04:01 PM
Vacation during Parenting Time breakingfree Divorce & Family Law 13 10-20-2012 10:26 AM
Child Support - should I ask my EX to pay for my 19 year full time high school studen Margaret-Krupa Financial Issues 17 10-18-2012 10:51 PM
Motion to Vary - Applicant's affidavit dickstacie Divorce & Family Law 4 02-17-2010 04:26 PM
what is going to happen if i don't have income in a short time for paying child suppo And Financial Issues 5 07-17-2008 07:34 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:05 AM.