Hi Everyone,
It is always amazing to see the powerful tide that has swept from the legal matters of WorkingDad and the efforts many have put in to assist him. WD has truly changed the face of family law.
False allegations and false emergencies are less likely to result in a parent losing access and being stuck with supervised access.
Oh, and if everyone is wondering where the Applicant got all the ideas about "emotional abuse" one just has to read her twitter feed to see where it came from...
2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII) -> Coe v. Tope, 2014 ONSC 4002 (CanLII) -> Geadah v Geadah, 2015 ONSC 2562 (CanLII)
CanLII - 2015 ONSC 2562 (CanLII)
Not much to review in this one. Straight forward and to the point. (LF32 you should add this to your BoA.)
Negative Advocate Lawyers should also take note too!
Robert Haas of Thomson Mahoney Delorey, Barristers & Solicitors should be ashamed of himself and his transparent conduct.
Good Luck!
Tayken
It is always amazing to see the powerful tide that has swept from the legal matters of WorkingDad and the efforts many have put in to assist him. WD has truly changed the face of family law.
False allegations and false emergencies are less likely to result in a parent losing access and being stuck with supervised access.
Oh, and if everyone is wondering where the Applicant got all the ideas about "emotional abuse" one just has to read her twitter feed to see where it came from...
2011 ONSC 6451 (CanLII) -> Coe v. Tope, 2014 ONSC 4002 (CanLII) -> Geadah v Geadah, 2015 ONSC 2562 (CanLII)
CanLII - 2015 ONSC 2562 (CanLII)
Not much to review in this one. Straight forward and to the point. (LF32 you should add this to your BoA.)
Negative Advocate Lawyers should also take note too!
[7] Here, I have not been persuaded that the father is a violent, controlling, uninterested parent who needs anger management and as well as has to be restrained from rampant drug use. The material relied upon by the mother and the submissions made by her counsel have taken two incidents of grabbing the eight-year-old’s arm, separated by a couple of months and paired them with a one-time incident involving throwing a computer tablet. This, it was argued, creates a picture of an angry, controlling, unrestrained father. I was not impressed by counsel’s attempt to turn the tablet incident into five separate examples of violence. As well, I was not convinced that the 10 pages of BBM text conversations as selected by the mother show that all issues except support had been agreed to by the parties and that failure to get his way on support had led to an unjustified claim for shared parenting by the father. I am satisfied that prior to the mother leaving the home for a short period of time after the police intervention on February 12th that a shared parenting arrangement existed where both parents were more or less equally involved. I am therefore satisfied that the shared parenting schedule as proposed by the respondent husband best satisfies the criteria as set out in s. 24 of the Children’s Law Reform Act , R.S.O. 1990 c. C-12. Given the father’s schedule of the family history and the current short distance between residences, it is in my view preferable that the children be in the care of the father after school until pick up by the mother on her days. I accept this arrangement as preferable to other alternatives, including daycare.
Good Luck!
Tayken
Comment