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 03-15-2014, 07:24 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 274
mememe is on a distinguished road
Default

Your comment is helpful. I think keeping the messages "I am here to settle". We want a "win win". "How is this helpful in moving this forward". In answers and in our minds will allow one to direct the conversations.

To the question of court-- I never wanteds to go to court. I kEep hearing less than 20 per cent go to court. That is the 10 per cent out. Of my hands. They are forcing us gto court.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2014, 07:30 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 385
momforever1956 is on a distinguished road
Default

Mememe, it sounds like to me that you are living exactly what I endured the last 5 years. Hang in there, as long as you an prove the numbers he will be backed to the wall. I believe we share a lot, as in the profession of our x spouce, our religion, ( I got my get within 6 weeks of separation, lucky me as if it hadn't been done immediately and he realized the importance it would have never been done.)
I truly feel what you are dealing with. Ultimately during arbitration his salary was more than doubled and that is what my SS was based on. Unfortunately I could not prove the assets out of the country although I did hire a private detective but the costs started to escalate and I could not longer move forward.
If I can help in any way private message me. Been there. done that and with success. I am protected from arbitration date for 5 years with a clause that says no change no matter what and I am permitted to work, (which I am doing having been out of the work force for 25 years.)
In 2017 we will re-negotiate. Of course he has sold his offices. He is setting up to have zero income.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2014, 07:32 PM
paco's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 274
paco is on a distinguished road
Default

Yes, that's right, I was forced to go to court, so if they want a play, then let's play, let's rock them hard, and this is what I'm going to do. There is a dark road ahead, but at the end I'm going to see the sun for my little ones!

Sent from my SGH-I717D using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 03-15-2014, 10:51 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,838
stripes is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
Hi All,

I think a vast majority of the responses provided by senior posters on this forum regarding new posters "complaints" about the other parent/ex-partner are summed up best by the Honourable Mr. Justice Quinn in para. 2:



Stirling v. Blake, 2013 ONSC 5216 (CanLII)
Date: 2013-08-12
Docket: 1068/00
URL: CanLII - 2013 ONSC 5216 (CanLII)
Citation: Stirling v. Blake, 2013 ONSC 5216 (CanLII)

Cheers Justice Quinn! Thank-you for being a Family Law Justice!

Good Luck!
Tayken
I read through the case (which must say something about the state of my social life, if this is what I'm doing on a Saturday night!). While it sounds like a complete trainwreck, with duelling parents working hard to screw up the kids, I was taken aback by the sarcastic and snide tone employed by the judge. Many of her comments are clever and funny, but struck me as unprofessional, compared to other cases I have read. Of what possible relevance is it that one party has used five different surnames, or that Hank Williams recorded a song in 1950 that describes a situation similar to the respondent's?

I have no doubt that dealing with people like these two, day in and day out (65 appearances in court in 10 years!) is frustrating, but the judge comes off as flippant and exasperated, rather than thoughtful. I have a job where I am frequently dealing with people whom I think are unreasonable, but I try to keep my exasperation out of official communication. Take a couple of yoga breaths, go for a walk, visualize your happy place ... and then sit down and get back to work.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 03-17-2014, 04:15 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,569
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 paco View Post
Thanks for sharing this with us Tayken, this is an excellent example of the right approach by the judge!

Sent from my SGH-I717D using Tapatalk
Paco,

Then you should read this case law that I reviewed on the forum.

http://www.ottawadivorce.com/forum/f...-mossip-13753/

Justice Mossip is one of a handful of very good justices... Czutrin, Pazaratz, Harper, etc... This case law talks directly to the nonsense that people bring to court and is one of the most human decisions I have ever come across.

I constantly cite Justice Mossip from this case law... I am of the opinion that as part the the MEP process all litigants should be required to read this case law and sign a disclosure that they did.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 03-17-2014, 04:26 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,569
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 stripes View Post
While it sounds like a complete trainwreck, with duelling parents working hard to screw up the kids, I was taken aback by the sarcastic and snide tone employed by the judge. Many of her comments are clever and funny, but struck me as unprofessional, compared to other cases I have read.
If you are not familiar Justice Quinn is one of the most cited justices in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Family Law.

Also, I guess you have never read Bruni v. Bruni (Justice Quinn) or the hundreds of articles written about it either.

In family court, a judge turns to ridicule to defuse the rage - The Globe and Mail

Quote:
And he anticipates criticism of his tone: "The parties repeatedly have shown they are immune to reason. Consequently, in my decision, I have tried ridicule as a last resort."
Furthermore this is what Phil Epstien (A highly respected family law lawyer) had to say:

Quote:
Toronto lawyer Phil Epstein, an expert in family law, describes Judge Quinn as a respected jurist who was justified in ridiculing the couple. "I'm sure there will be some who criticize Justice Quinn for this," he said. "But others will say that sometimes you have to step back and laugh at the foibles of mankind."

Family law judges spent their time dealing with inflamed litigants whose stories are "highly conflicting and replete with inappropriate behaviour and misconduct," Mr. Epstein said. "They use the courtroom as a forum for all the wrongs that have been done to them in their marriage. It is not surprising that some judges try to find a better way to help resolve their problems."
So, although you may take offense, I am of a similar opinion as Kirk (author of the article) and Phil on his approach to these high conflict cases.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stripes View Post
Of what possible relevance is it that one party has used five different surnames, or that Hank Williams recorded a song in 1950 that describes a situation similar to the respondent's?
See the article above. The parties submitted something in the matter that is completely irrelevant thinking the evidence was "relevant". He is just taking a different approach with two parents who won't listen to rational thought. So he is using satire to identify the complete absurdity of the matter.

(See the article linked above...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by stripes View Post
I have no doubt that dealing with people like these two, day in and day out (65 appearances in court in 10 years!) is frustrating, but the judge comes off as flippant and exasperated, rather than thoughtful.
To you. But, to the rest of the legal profession (e.g. Phil Epstein) it is justified and needed. It is actually welcomed by most involved in the nonsense that is 90% of family law trials.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stripes View Post
I have a job where I am frequently dealing with people whom I think are unreasonable, but I try to keep my exasperation out of official communication.
Justice Quinn takes a different approach and has always... He is the justice who famously identified that a child is not an appendage of a mother and that breast feeding will have to end one day. He takes a very pragmatic and frank approach to matters. Often, it is exactly what these highly conflicted matters need. Someone to identify how stupid it all is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stripes View Post
Take a couple of yoga breaths, go for a walk, visualize your happy place ... and then sit down and get back to work.
Not to be insulting but, you should spend more time in a court room. A large portion of that before the family courts is nonsense like this.

Oh and here is the link to Bruni v. Bruni for you: CanLII - 2010 ONSC 6568 (CanLII)

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 03-17-2014, 07:20 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,838
stripes is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
If you are not familiar Justice Quinn is one of the most cited justices in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Family Law.



Not to be insulting but, you should spend more time in a court room. A large portion of that before the family courts is nonsense like this.

Oh and here is the link to Bruni v. Bruni for you: CanLII - 2010 ONSC 6568 (CanLII)

Good Luck!
Tayken
No offense taken at all. I have been fortunate enough to avoid all courtrooms so far, so I'm not familiar with what is considered acceptable in judgments like these. Justice Quinn certainly has a knack for vivid expressions, and probably has a future as a novelist if she ever retires from the bench.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 03-18-2014, 02:48 PM
Tayken's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6,569
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 paco View Post
Yes, that's right, I was forced to go to court, so if they want a play, then let's play, let's rock them hard, and this is what I'm going to do. There is a dark road ahead, but at the end I'm going to see the sun for my little ones!

Sent from my SGH-I717D using Tapatalk
And as a result of your attitude (see red) that your children will truly lose Paco.

1. Family law is not a war - there are NO WINNERS.

2. There are only losers in family law. Parents lose and children truly LOSE when their parents "rock the other party hard".

3. Your attitude needs to change NOW on your position and approach to family law.

4. If you have a lawyer, no doubt you will be the next poster who will come to this forum jaded, stating that family law is against them and that they spent all their money pursuing nonsense arguments and blaming everyone but themselves for their results.

5. Family law is not about "justice". It is not about "morals".

6. Emotional reasoning is not evidence.

7. You and the other parent would be better served attending a more therapeutic-oriented intervention with someone like Dr. Barbara Landau conducting mediating-arbitrating than fighting it out in court.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 03-18-2014, 05:38 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:
2. There are only losers in family law. Parents lose and children truly LOSE when their parents "rock the other party hard".
Following up on this, some questions:

What is your desired outcome from the court process?

If you had the choice, would you rather express love for your children or hatred for your ex? Do you hate your ex more than you love your children?

Do you acknowledge that your children may love both of their parents, and will feel any hurt inflicted on a loved one?

Have you considered counselling, to address the feelings of anger towards your ex, and disappointment that changes in your life (potentially because of your ex initiating them) have resulted in a decrease in your overall satisfaction with life?
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2014, 12:27 PM
paco's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 274
paco is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tayken View Post
And as a result of your attitude (see red) that your children will truly lose Paco.

1. Family law is not a war - there are NO WINNERS.

2. There are only losers in family law. Parents lose and children truly LOSE when their parents "rock the other party hard".

3. Your attitude needs to change NOW on your position and approach to family law.

4. If you have a lawyer, no doubt you will be the next poster who will come to this forum jaded, stating that family law is against them and that they spent all their money pursuing nonsense arguments and blaming everyone but themselves for their results.

5. Family law is not about "justice". It is not about "morals".

6. Emotional reasoning is not evidence.

7. You and the other parent would be better served attending a more therapeutic-oriented intervention with someone like Dr. Barbara Landau conducting mediating-arbitrating than fighting it out in court.

Good Luck!
Tayken
Tayken, it's so easy to judge but hard to be in a position when you have to fight with a system, my attitude has been changed completely since she took the kids away from me and continuously trying to isolate them from me, creating a status quo by abuse and deceit, so don't get confused by my wording, there is no hate in that but determination to fight for my rights as an equal parent, I was always an equal parent, and my children deserves equal parenting, I strongly believe in this. Btw, I had a lawyer and I fired her, a very expensive one, she didn't believe of that what I have to do is the right thing for my kids, so I let her go. No one can ever better represent me but myself.
About your last sentence #7, she's the kind of person that doesn't communicate, it's complicated and it's not the time and place to explain in details here. What I can say is that we had a million other options rather than to go through court, it was not my call, so since I let my former lawyer go I understood very well what family law stands for, and I really hope that judges do too.
Thanks for your understanding and comments too, Tayken. Cheers.

Sent from my SGH-I717D using Tapatalk
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
Ontario Justice Bruce Pugsley's recent comments in family court logicalvelocity Political Issues 7 09-22-2010 06:10 PM
A long hello SillyMe Introductions 20 05-16-2008 01:30 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:33 PM.