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
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 11-03-2017, 03:30 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,563
Tayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant futureTayken has a brilliant future
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by plainNamedDad44 View Post
Got this last night. Remember, this is after a first extension which she agreed to, then a second due to a car accident where I set the date, in a peremptory manner.

"I am involved in a very serious and lengthy trial. You are already aware of this.


So are most people. She is barking up the wrong tree. Furthermore, this is paperwork that has been expected for a while now. Also, she knows when she is scheduled for trial. Not like this stuff sneaks up on lawyers. LOL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plainNamedDad44 View Post
It is not acceptable for you to unilaterally dictate a schedule and demand I comply with it. If you were counsel, you would understand this. if you were reasonable you would understand this.
You can kindly remind the lawyer of:

https://www.lsuc.on.ca/with.aspx?id=...ers-and-others

7.2-1 A lawyer shall be courteous, civil, and act in good faith with all persons with whom the lawyer has dealings in the course of their practice.

[1] The public interest demands that matters entrusted to a lawyer be dealt with effectively and expeditiously, and fair and courteous dealing on the part of each lawyer engaged in a matter will contribute materially to this end. The lawyer who behaves otherwise does a disservice to the client, and neglect of the rule will impair the ability of lawyers to perform their function properly.

[2] Any ill feeling that may exist or be engendered between clients, particularly during litigation, should never be allowed to influence lawyers in their conduct and demeanour toward other legal practitioners or the parties. The presence of personal animosity between legal practitioners involved in a matter may cause their judgment to be clouded by emotional factors and hinder the proper resolution of the matter. Personal remarks or personally abusive tactics interfere with the orderly administration of justice and have no place in our legal system.

[3] A lawyer should avoid ill-considered or uninformed criticism of the competence, conduct, advice, or charges of other legal practitioners, but should be prepared, when requested, to advise and represent a client in a complaint involving another legal practitioner.

7.2-1.1 A lawyer shall agree to reasonable requests concerning trial dates, adjournments, the waiver of procedural formalities, and similar matters that do not prejudice the rights of the client.

7.2-2 A lawyer shall avoid sharp practice and shall not take advantage of or act without fair warning upon slips, irregularities, or mistakes on the part of other legal practitioners not going to the merits or involving the sacrifice of a client's rights.

7.2-4 A lawyer shall not in the course of professional practice send correspondence or otherwise communicate to a client, another legal practitioner, or any other person in a manner that is abusive, offensive, or otherwise inconsistent with the proper tone of a professional communication from a lawyer.

7.2-5 A lawyer shall answer with reasonable promptness all professional letters and communications from other legal practitioners that require an answer, and a lawyer shall be punctual in fulfilling all commitments.

Feel free to use her own governing body's rules against her and remind them of them. Feel free to quote them and ask how her response does not violate them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plainNamedDad44 View Post
I will seek leave of the Court, in particular Justice XXXXX and plead my case to his/her Honour.

You will be served in due course. "
Your response to the "you will be served in due course" should be:

Would it not be easier to complete your client's paperwork that was by order of the Honourable Justice Whomever to be completed and filed on day, month, year and then extended further to accommodate you on day, month, year? My understanding is that what you are proposing to do because I am "not counsel", "do not understand" and I am "unreasonable" and further to your quote again, "do not understand" would require more effort than simply doing what was already ordered. What I do indeed understand Ms. Lawyer is that deadlines have been given to us by the court, have been extended and those deadlines have not been met.

I point you to the recent words of the Honourable Mr. Justice Pazaratz in (case law I cited above) and remind you that it is a complete waste of court services to continue to extend this matter further. If you are unable to comply what was ordered and already agreed upon for an extension and you are too busy that you have another representative assist in the matter from your firm.

Quote:
Originally Posted by plainNamedDad44 View Post
So the reasons seem to be alternating between her case load, and car accident. I called BS. I told her no further extensions, and to get her act together, and that I didn't think the Justice would be too impressed with her track record of keeping deadlines on this matter.


Thoughts ?
See above... I am sure OrleansLawyer will slap me for this one. But, I hate those kinds of repugnant responses from lawyers to unrepresented litigants. Especially ones who are probably on Legal Aid Certificates.

Last edited by Tayken; 11-03-2017 at 03:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 11-03-2017, 03:46 PM
plainNamedDad44's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 817
plainNamedDad44 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
So are most people. She is barking up the wrong tree. Furthermore, this is paperwork that has been expected for a while now. Also, she knows when she is scheduled for trial. Not like this stuff sneaks up on lawyers. LOL.



You can kindly remind the lawyer of:

https://www.lsuc.on.ca/with.aspx?id=...ers-and-others

7.2-1 A lawyer shall be courteous, civil, and act in good faith with all persons with whom the lawyer has dealings in the course of their practice.

[1] The public interest demands that matters entrusted to a lawyer be dealt with effectively and expeditiously, and fair and courteous dealing on the part of each lawyer engaged in a matter will contribute materially to this end. The lawyer who behaves otherwise does a disservice to the client, and neglect of the rule will impair the ability of lawyers to perform their function properly.

[2] Any ill feeling that may exist or be engendered between clients, particularly during litigation, should never be allowed to influence lawyers in their conduct and demeanour toward other legal practitioners or the parties. The presence of personal animosity between legal practitioners involved in a matter may cause their judgment to be clouded by emotional factors and hinder the proper resolution of the matter. Personal remarks or personally abusive tactics interfere with the orderly administration of justice and have no place in our legal system.

[3] A lawyer should avoid ill-considered or uninformed criticism of the competence, conduct, advice, or charges of other legal practitioners, but should be prepared, when requested, to advise and represent a client in a complaint involving another legal practitioner.

7.2-1.1 A lawyer shall agree to reasonable requests concerning trial dates, adjournments, the waiver of procedural formalities, and similar matters that do not prejudice the rights of the client.

7.2-2 A lawyer shall avoid sharp practice and shall not take advantage of or act without fair warning upon slips, irregularities, or mistakes on the part of other legal practitioners not going to the merits or involving the sacrifice of a client's rights.

7.2-4 A lawyer shall not in the course of professional practice send correspondence or otherwise communicate to a client, another legal practitioner, or any other person in a manner that is abusive, offensive, or otherwise inconsistent with the proper tone of a professional communication from a lawyer.

7.2-5 A lawyer shall answer with reasonable promptness all professional letters and communications from other legal practitioners that require an answer, and a lawyer shall be punctual in fulfilling all commitments.

Feel free to use her own governing body's rules against her and remind them of them. Feel free to quote them and ask how her response does not violate them.



Your response to the "you will be served in due course" should be:

Would it not be easier to complete your client's paperwork that was by order of the Honourable Justice Whomever to be completed and filed on day, month, year and then extended further to accommodate you on day, month, year? My understanding is that what you are proposing to do because I am "not counsel", "do not understand" and I am "unreasonable" and further to your quote again, "do not understand" would require more effort than simply doing what was already ordered. What I do indeed understand Ms. Lawyer is that deadlines have been given to us by the court, have been extended and those deadlines have not been met.

I point you to the recent words of the Honourable Mr. Justice Pazaratz in (case law I cited above) and remind you that it is a complete waste of court services to continue to extend this matter further. If you are unable to comply what was ordered and already agreed upon for an extension and you are too busy that you have another representative assist in the matter from your firm.



See above... I am sure OrleansLawyer will slap me for this one. But, I hate those kinds of repugnant responses from lawyers to unrepresented litigants. Especially ones who are probably on Legal Aid Certificates.

Bazinga !!!! Thank you Tayken. I fail to see how I would/could look like a d*ck after two extensions.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 11-03-2017, 04:03 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 2,979
rockscan will become famous soon enough
Default

Like I said, shes simply trying to scare you into doing what she wants. “Ohh the big bad lawyer lady is going to the judge to get their sympathy”. IF that happened Im sure the judge would school her on proper behaviour.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2017, 10:06 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

I understood that the matter was set down for a motion/hearing date. Move forwards with your case; if the other side isn't doing their job that is their problem.

Are you prejudiced by an adjournment (other than the aggravation of delay)? If so, point that out in an e-mail, stating you will oppose any request for adjournment.

Quote:
I am sure OrleansLawyer will slap me for this one.
The other lawyer is saying, "your life needs to be on hold because I don't have the time to do my job". That is her problem to resolve, not yours. If dates were set/agreed on (particularly in a court order) then the lawyer needs to manage their case load.

People proceed with their cases under the assumption that everyone will follow the set timelines.
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2017, 10:22 AM
plainNamedDad44's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 817
plainNamedDad44 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
I understood that the matter was set down for a motion/hearing date. Move forwards with your case; if the other side isn't doing their job that is their problem.

Are you prejudiced by an adjournment (other than the aggravation of delay)? If so, point that out in an e-mail, stating you will oppose any request for adjournment.



The other lawyer is saying, "your life needs to be on hold because I don't have the time to do my job". That is her problem to resolve, not yours. If dates were set/agreed on (particularly in a court order) then the lawyer needs to manage their case load.

People proceed with their cases under the assumption that everyone will follow the set timelines.
Thanks OL, STBX's lawyer emailed me this morning indicating that her intention is to serve me with the responding affidavit. NO INDICATION WHATSOEVER as to when.

I responded saying that the second extension that was provided was 'peremptory', which implies that I would not consent to service at this point.

Justice has already chewed her out once for not adhering to timelines. My sense is to let her have to bring a 14B and try to account for herself in asking permission to serve me this late, after two extensions. This BS has to stop !

Question 1: If she does bring a 14B forward, my concern is that she would do it ex parte, i.e. without serving me, in which case she would lie about the extensions I provided, as I would not have a chance to respond. Can she bring the 14B foward ex parte ?

Question 2: We are headed to trial, and this issue lingering arguably prejudices efforts to get the balance of matters to trial. That is why no further extension. Thoughts ?

Question 3: Forcing her to have to ask the Justice for an extension after 2 extensions (which is 3 dates) shows the justice what a twit she is. Is this not in my favor ?
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2017, 12:19 PM
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:
Question 1: If she does bring a 14B forward, my concern is that she would do it ex parte, i.e. without serving me, in which case she would lie about the extensions I provided, as I would not have a chance to respond. Can she bring the 14B foward ex parte ?
If she lies in affidavits, and you have proof to the contrary, then that would constitute perjury and would be actionable.

However, I do not see how this would be brought ex parte.

Quote:
Question 2: We are headed to trial, and this issue lingering arguably prejudices efforts to get the balance of matters to trial. That is why no further extension. Thoughts ?
If there is an Order for items to be provided by a certain date, and it hasn't been, a follow up motion would be to have those items excluded from the case. Or, if they are to provide materials for a date, to have the date proceed.

Quote:
Question 3: Forcing her to have to ask the Justice for an extension after 2 extensions (which is 3 dates) shows the justice what a twit she is. Is this not in my favor ?
No. The judge at trial does not care if her lawyer is a twit, because you are litigating against your STBX - not her lawyer. Her lawyer does not matter. Do not lose sight of the forest for the trees.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 11-08-2017, 12:56 PM
plainNamedDad44's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 817
plainNamedDad44 is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrleansLawyer View Post
If she lies in affidavits, and you have proof to the contrary, then that would constitute perjury and would be actionable.

However, I do not see how this would be brought ex parte.



If there is an Order for items to be provided by a certain date, and it hasn't been, a follow up motion would be to have those items excluded from the case. Or, if they are to provide materials for a date, to have the date proceed.



No. The judge at trial does not care if her lawyer is a twit, because you are litigating against your STBX - not her lawyer. Her lawyer does not matter. Do not lose sight of the forest for the trees.

So what do I do? let STBX's lawyer crap all over timelines and consent to as many extensions as she needs ? This rampant abuse of deadlines must end.
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
Direct Communication to opposing lawyer allowed? bjm44 Divorce & Family Law 3 11-24-2014 09:28 AM
Preparing file for lawyer hemademesingle Divorce & Family Law 21 11-24-2012 09:39 PM
Can my lawyer berate me? Holly Divorce & Family Law 8 07-11-2012 01:35 PM
worse off with a lawyer? gumby Divorce & Family Law 9 10-24-2010 01:53 PM
Sounds like my lawyer is gonna bail on me... sasha1 Divorce & Family Law 26 01-18-2006 07:13 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:07 PM.