It's going to be a hot summer!!

[rockscan]

Was there any documentation in it from a professional about D4s state of mind mental health emotional status?

Judges are pretty astute especially when theres no FACT. You havent made any serious "shes unhappy with her mother" comments in any of your materials and youre asking for more time and school. Remember that part. You arent the one trying to take the child from a parent.

Working nights and weekends? Are you kidding me? Why the eff isnt she working????

[MrToronto]

Yes Arabians right bafflegab for a adjournment

No proof on statements made by Goldilocks except her gut feelings and observations...geeze I wonder why they ain't good towards LF32

Judge will be amazed that Goldilocks is the first case he/she has ever read that an EX is Satan's spawn.

Of course LF32 is like a dog running after every issue (a car) that Goldilocks/scumbag lawyer drive by with. (forgets he already chased down more than a few)

All a Judge cares about is determining the issues presented in the Motion by LF32

SO if you intend on going to the town fair to only ride the ferris wheel and roller coaster.....do that and don't wander over to get candy apples and the go through the haunted house.

Focus on playgroups vs j/k
Focus on changing access time..........which typically EX's that resist change do the shot gun effect .....No he's Satan's spawn...No he won't chat...No he won't do beddy bye at my time....No NO NO NO

Have to remember Motions are for interim stuff...but there's lots of sworn crap (from OP) that will be used against them.....inconsistencies, contradictions... etc

If you stick to the issue and write very little doing it.....it'll be hard to get dirt by OP. (believe me OP's reach back YEARS for dirt and lots of tasty bits in the Continuing Record)

Another thing you got to look for is the "ticky boxes" and any statement below it..........I Disagree...........for this claim against

the reason why is........blah blah blah

when you go into blah blah blah......you'll find there is no clear cut NO for this or that reason/fact....it's the (shotgun approach) and a EX dancing all around the NO and just pleading with a Judge to see her/him/it's side...but a straight out NO....never happens.

It doesn't happen because OP thinks there position is weak (so pile on the garbage) and that LF32 has RIGHTS....which are getting stronger with each and every win.

OP doesn't have a clear NO.....because he's got a criminal record or lives under a bridge...or belongs to a cult...or failed a drug test.

All OP can do is blow smoke which may or may not be good enough depending on the political leanings of a Judge.

whats the downside for a Judge saying OK for J/K (interim) and a time change (but not to sole)(interim) until a final determination can be made at a trial?

Goldilocks wins playgroups at Trial fine...pull junior out of J/K (doubt it)

[arabian]

Agree with Mr. T. - only issues raised in motion will be dealt with.
Did ex present a cross-motion? No
Did ex submit any case law to support her weak position?

I believe ex merely highlighted her failings at previous case conferences.
Brilliant!

[Rioe]

Sounds like it basically boils down to three main themes.

Manipulating the Legal System - The other side is using every trick at their disposal, from the initial abduction, to the false allegations, to the last minute/late filings, to delay matters and prolong the status quo that favours them. You believe that a final decision is needed as soon as possible so the games can end and good coparenting can be established. Ask for a solid interim order that puts you on a good track for a trial for a final order, instead of anything that encourages additional delays or further prolongs the false status quo previously established through manipulation.

Selfishness and Possessiveness about the Child - The other side is upholding the old-fashioned, sexist and divisive parenting model that has a stay at home woman doing all the child-rearing while the man focuses on earning as much money as possible somewhere else. You believe that a better model is the contemporary one that has BOTH parents working reasonable full time hours to support themselves and their children, and having equal time with the children. Ask for a 50-50 schedule with spelled-out non-negotiable division of holidays. Ask that offset CS follow, with a minimum wage income imputed to your ex, if not a typical paralegal income, unless she finds full-time employment and wants to use that income instead. Ask that any setup that encourages further delays (see previous point) be avoided.

Effective Parenting - The other side insists that the child is suffering emotional issues and isn't ready for school, but won't see an appropriate professional about these alleged concerns. You have not seen any serious emotional issues at your home, though of course, transition problems could be anticipated considering what is going on behind the scenes. You have training in dealing with emotional issues for children experiencing family separation, believe that the child would benefit from proper socialization such as JK in the fall, and are quite willing to be involved in appropriate counselling for the child under the guidance of a professional to address the mother's concerns. You believe that possible issues could be resolved by having a routine the child can rely on instead of continuing the upheaval of the past year and more. Ask that the order provide for the child to attend JK in the fall, in the school in your area (where you work?), that any counselling be done with a qualified professional you are referred to through the family doctor, and that your ex take a course for parenting through separation and divorce to provide her with more knowledge and tools for any transition issues.

In conclusion, all your ex's arguments about your unfitness as a parent have been proved baseless and the child is flourishing in your care, so there is no reason not to have the 50-50 parenting and school attendance arrangements that are normal for children in modern divorce situations.

[BlueDressInToronto]

Rioe that's an amazing summary of the situation! I want to cheer!

[LovingFather32]

This weekend was a busy one. D4 all day (which was amazing) and worked hard on case all night. Spent some time at my lawyers today helping finish the factum and our second reply to their last minute BS.

If you recall ex's affidavit is all over the map again.

i.e - In one paragraph D4 shuts down .. the next she's talking up a storm to ex about visits when she returns.

Ex says D4 pretends to sleep when she gets home. (From the Grilling?) I'd pretend to be asleep too! (Then she says she actually sleeps, and rages, and , and .. you get it).

We have some great case law, affidavits and exhibits.

Even her few exhibits (texts, etc) illustrated me to be reasonable.

Who knows what'll happen tomorrow. School would be HUGE though!

Some good topics include:

(4) Capacity and Disposition to Provide Guidance, Education, Necessaries of Life, Etc. 32

(a) Ability of the parent to understand and meet the needs of the child

(vi) Ability of parent to provide for child financially

(b) Ability of the parent to stimulate the child intellectually and encourage education

(h) Maximum Contact Principle - Willingness to foster contact with the other parent

(5) Proposed Plans for Care and Upbringing

(6) Permanence and Stability of the Proposed Family Unit

I think we should do okay. She buried herself again in her affidavit's.

I just dont get how she doesn't see her contractions.

i.e - She claims D4 has "REFUSED" to sleep alone since the motion.

----->Jan 9th in communication book she writes:

"D4 had a great sleep alone in her big girl bed. She's full of energy this morning. I know Im noticing the improvements too.

Does she forget writing this?

What about her claim that I make D4 keeps secrets?

Exhibit __. D4 told the CAS neither parent asked her to keep any secrets and that no parent said bad things about the other parent.

I have exhibits for her points .. but mostly I just let her contradict her own self in her affidavit. She jumps all over the place.

It's a straw grasping game .. not many straws left.

One of the more entertaining was:

He wants to force me back to work so that I cant spend as much time with D4 and so that he doesnt have to give child support?

Huh? CS has nothing to do with school. No way Id just want D4 to be in j/k right .. best interest.

Oh ... and then there's the OP wanting to discuss the CC ans SC ..which was without prejudice and not why we are there tomorrow! ... but it's just full of good stuff too.

The SC judge wanted us to wait 3 months to see how things are settled .. so we waited more than that. We did what she asked. If OP wanted another SC they should have asked for one. Mat. Change Cir's out the ying yang so we;re fine anyways!

They wanted to muddy the waters .. but we're keeping our issues straight .. even narrowed our factum down to 16 pg's,(from 20).

She wants me to work a full time day job, and nights .. and weekends.

Who's really the one intentionally unemployed?

Guess we'll see!!!

[LovingFather32]

Not that I mind the CC transcripts .. but..judges disagree.

CanLII - 2009 CanLII 60665 (ON SC)

[9] While Rule 17 does not expressly prohibit the use of the transcript of a conference, in my view, the spirit of Rule 17 (23) is to ensure that the conferences are conducted in a frank and open atmosphere for the purpose of achieving settlement of all or some of the issues in dispute. Full and frank settlement discussions cannot be had if the parties have concerns that the transcript of their discussions may be available for use at trial or on a motion. Ready disclosure of such transcripts would have a chilling effect on the settlement discussions.

[10] In my view, the request by the Respondent for production of the transcript of the conference held before me must be denied. No legitimate reason has been offered for production of the transcript and the probative value of the transcript would not outweigh the possible harm resulting from its availability and use.

But again .. I welcome them. They actually help me!

I'm pretty sure OP will get slammed for digging them up ..

[Rioe]

One of the more entertaining was:

He wants to force me back to work so that I cant spend as much time with D4 and so that he doesnt have to give child support?

Huh? CS has nothing to do with school. No way Id just want D4 to be in j/k right .. best interest.

She wants me to work a full time day job, and nights .. and weekends.

Who's really the one intentionally unemployed

Grown adults should be working full time to support themselves and their families, except when there are extenuating circumstances, such as attending school, being disabled, or being willingly supported by a spouse. Your ex has none of these excuses.

Grown adults should be supporting their children in proportion to their financial ability. Hence the child support tables, and the offset system, and the notion of imputing income.

Grown adults should not have to work more than normal full time hours unless they choose to, not because it is dictated to them by an ex-spouse. Honestly, of all her wild claims, that's the craziest one.

[rockscan]

There are thousands of parents out there who would give anything to stay home with their kids but they know working gives their family a better life. Your ex is a horrible person for thinking shes entitled to that on mine and everyone elses tax dollars!

[MrToronto]

I checked the other case law quoted in your above post on conferences and transcripts

http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2004/2004canlii24313/2004canlii24313.html

In both cases it seems a Motion was made to ask for the transcripts...but this LAO scumbag lawyer got it by just asking a Judge...and like I wrote prior the only way to get a Judge to give Approval is to pretend it was a child protection matter.

which yours wasn't/isn't

the above case law the Judge rejected approving the request for a transcript for a case conference anyways.

4: CONCLUSION
[26] The motion is lacking in proof of legitimate need, probative value and possible harm and, accordingly, is dismissed. If costs are a problem, I may be spoken to

I looked up probative value: evidence which is sufficiently useful to prove something important in a trial

Nothing in a Case Conference transcript helps the LAO scumbag prove anything important for a Trial.

But the point is THEY HAVE NO CASE....and OP has to build one from JUNK they collect along the way.

but be careful....even the OCL was trying to get you on "credibility" this is the cornerstone of there attack against your person. (and she pressed hard) (and looked hard at stuff)

Too the OP maybe "credibility" is major

Just like your attacking Goldilocks credibility of course.

I also wrote you that over time and enough Motions you'll see the entire hand of the OP for a Trial. SO watch and listen tomorrow, you'll get more insight for what's ahead.

Go over and over every credibility issue OP or OCL or anybody may have with you and every document you wrote on the issues they are most concerned with...so you never get tripped up under pressure in a witness box....which can get confusing as questions are twisted and come from different angles

LAO scumbag is going to add that stupid CC Transcript...to a balance of probabilities" steaming pile of manure on CREDIBILITY.

[LovingFather32]

Go over and over every credibility issue OP or OCL or anybody may have with you and every document you wrote on the issues they are most concerned with...so you never get tripped up under pressure in a witness box....which can get confusing as questions are twisted and come from different angles

Great advice. I know it'll be OCL Vs. CAS on a lot of issues (CAS already came out on top)

I think I should do okay on the stand .. It will be a nerve-wracking experience I'm sure.

[SadAndTired]

Grown adults should be working full time to support themselves and their families, except when there are extenuating circumstances, such as attending school, being disabled, or being willingly supported by a spouse. Your ex has none of these excuses.

Grown adults should be supporting their children in proportion to their financial ability. Hence the child support tables, and the offset system, and the notion of imputing income.

Grown adults should not have to work more than normal full time hours unless they choose to, not because it is dictated to them by an ex-spouse. Honestly, of all her wild claims, that's the craziest one.

Grown adults should also pay their child support and not allow it to go into arrears.

[BlueDressInToronto]

Good luck today. I will be thinking of you.

[LovingFather32]

Grown adults should also pay their child support and not allow it to go into arrears.

Couldn't help yourself. Go promote abduction, false allegations and playing the system somewhere else.
Ignore her Rioe .. she loves my ex's actions ... a little too much!

[kingstonmomof2]

Good luck today!!!!!!!