Is a lawyer ever held accountable for bad behaviour?

I thought that I could handle this myself, apparently not, judging by the last SC where I lost it.

Next time be it the trial or pre-trial CC I will have a DV advocate at my side ... this should hopefully help the STBX's disgusting lawyer shut his gob up!:)
 
Good idea. Use whatever resources are available to you. I found that my lawyer's impeccable manners and presence were such a contrast to the OC that the Judge was very quick to interject and express disapproval of the OC's presentation. At one time, when my ex was between lawyers, he was given enough 'rope to hang himself' and he came off as a fool. This did not bode well for him at all.

I am an aggressive individual and am able to stare-down my ex's lawyer without too much difficulty. I just remind myself that this poor witless fool does indeed want a reaction from me with the hope that I crater and settle.

Keep strong and remind yourself that you are much better than the hired help (OC).
 
Something else which is worthwhile and simple is to be sure to go online and post a comment on the local lawyer review blog.

Nowadays with the internet it is much easier to find out information about a lawyer before you retain one. Same goes for the OC (opposing counsel). Check CanLii to see what cases they have been counsel for.

I do realize that if a lawyer is reviewed by the law society that likely the worst discipline they are likely to receive is simply remedial reading.

Ironic that one of the most serious crimes a lawyer can be charged with is misappropriation of a trust account. Perhaps this is why lawyers are averse to having their client's accounts assessed??? Always about the money IMO.
 
arabian said:
Ironic that one of the most serious crimes a lawyer can be charged with is misappropriation of a trust account. Perhaps this is why lawyers are averse to having their client's accounts assessed??? Always about the money IMO.
Click to expand...

Yep, the only way to get their attention is through their pocket-book. Is it any wonder that the number one dirty lawyer tactic is to try to starve-out the opposing party with unnecessary motions, conferences and what I consider useless paperwork.

I'm not backing down regardless, thanks to years of intimidation - I have patience to spare and am frugal to a fault ... this is going to trial (unless the STBX expires before that date.) Que sera sera.
 
Hopefully you will have your judgement before your ex expires although I do believe that should he die before everything is wrapped up you would still be fighting his lawyer for the spoils/estate.

Remember all the money you spend on legal fees is 100% tax deductible because you are fighting for SS. Small consolation for what you are going through but it is something.
 
I've been reading up on what happens should one spouse drop dead before the divorce is settled. In Quebec the status quo SA is maintained (suits me fine) until a judge rules on the validity of any wills/insurance claims.

As a legal dependent of the estate (SS) I would have the right to go to court and sue any inheritors. Also his lawyer would not be taking care of this case if it were an estate settlement. A new lawyer would be assigned ... could not be any worse than this jerk!
 
I can't follow the thinking behind seeing criminal justice served in the family law system as a fair system. Should one receive a punitive family law position because they have behaved poorly under criminal law? I personally don't think so - that is why we have a criminal law system.

I also don't follow the thinking behind believing random lawyers are acting out on their clients' behalf -- actually, this rather made me laugh out loud. They follow client directives. If you want to put your big girl (boy) panties on, hire one who will ONLY (Ontario) do collaborative law. You'll easily separate the chuff from the chaff, and the crazy clients can be picked out.

I suppose there could be a random few lawyers who are ramped up on testerone/whatever pill is available at the gym/girls on a mission (we have one here in our area nicknamed "trickydicky"), but I suspect for 99% lawyers, its a job. We also have a nickname for clients, who are ramped up on righteousness and revenge.
 
Canadian divorce act recognizes mental & physical cruelty as well as adultery. Mental and physical violence may also be punishable in criminal court. I believe the two courts (family and criminal) do indeed intersect - under the auspices of Child Services or other government agencies. If this weren't true then why do family courts even hear any evidence at all about allegations of abuse from one spouse against the other?

I often read about how people want to hire the "meanest, nastiest" lawyer to take care of their ex in family court. These same people are usually the first to complain when their court matters are not settled in a timely manner. With this in mind I do believe people have to take more responsibility for their lawyer's actions. If your lawyer blatantly lies and it is proven then the person who retained this person should be held responsible. Kind of like being financially responsible when one's child damages property.


I think it would be helpful if the judges in family court exercise their discretion to strike pleadings for perjury. I asked someone once why perjury charges are not pursued in family court and was told that it would be cost-prohibitive.
 
Last edited:
arabian;189105. I believe the two courts (family and criminal) do indeed intersect - under the auspices of Child Services or other government agencies. If this weren't true then why do family courts even hear any evidence at all about allegations of abuse from one spouse against the other? [/QUOTE said:
They don't. They shouldn't.
Click to expand...
 
The way I see it is this: If I had been physically attacked by some random stranger I believe that there would have been stiffer fines and probably jail time. Since the perpetrator was my ex-spouse it is labelled a "domestic incident" and for whatever reason it is made commonplace .... go figure?

The problem I have is when the family court system is used as a way for an angry spouse to exact revenge via his lawyer. In other words , he/she left me, he/she cheated on me, he/she was violent, he/she called the police so now I will pay my lawyer to make her/his life a living hell!

Mcdreamy's claim that 99% of lawyers just see this as a job, I doubt that. Maybe I'm jaded, though I suspect that many lawyers are jaded as well, and clearly enjoy the mind-games that go on in our courtrooms - to the detriment of us all.
 
This is a neat read: http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/fv-vf/bpfv-pevf/bpfv-pevf.pdf


Furthermore, cases that involve allegations of family violence commonly involve more than one court. There may be parallel criminal, family law and child protection proceedings. The family (including the complainant, the accused and any children) may have contact with numerous agencies, including the police, the Crown, victim support services, health services, and child protection agencies.
Each different court and agency has its own priorities processes, procedures and schedules. The manner in which information is shared (or not shared) among the various stakeholders can have a substantial impact on all parties involved. A lack of coordination may result in confusion, inconsistent court orders and have implications for the safety of family members.
The purpose of this report is to explore "best practices" relating to cases making their way through the criminal justice system where there are parallel family court and child protection proceedings. The intent is to identify practices, which from the criminal law perspective, best promote the safety of family members while also ensuring a fair process for the accused.
Click to expand...
 
Janibel said:
The way I see it is this: If I had been physically attacked by some random stranger I believe that there would have been stiffer fines and probably jail time. Since the perpetrator was my ex-spouse it is labelled a "domestic incident" and for whatever reason it is made commonplace .... go figure?
Click to expand...

I too experienced frustration when my ex was charged with fraud over 5,000 and the crown prosecutor would not prosecute the matter deeming it a "family court matter" - this was after an intensive 6 month investigation and charges from the city police department.

Yes go figure?
 
LovingFather32 said:
This is a neat read: http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/fv-vf/bpfv-pevf/bpfv-pevf.pdf
Click to expand...

Here's the problem in a nutshell:

"Domestic violence or partner abuse is well recognized as a serious and complex issue. The response of the justice system, both family and criminal, is complicated by the fact that domestic violence often gives rise to myriad inter-related family problems involving safety and family separation.

Legal proceedings are further complicated by the fact that the criminal and family cases occur separately. The two courts operate independent silos with virtually no sharing of information between them and very little ability to communicate."
 
I think if you want to complain against the lawyer you need to have VERY specific complaints which cannot be defended by "I was acting in the interest of my client" and provable and documented.

The lawyer intimidated in me in a settlement conference or the hallway is meaningless, not provable and the lawyer can say "I really believed he was X"

In some cases, where there was a judicial sale of a home by bankruptcy lawyers tried to get colleagues to be managers of the home sale the judges ALWAYS say no because they say it is a conflict of interest and demeans the profession of the lawyer to be something like "money hungry".

You file a complaint against a lawyer, prepare to be called crazy....
 
Links17 said:
I think if you want to complain against the lawyer you need to have VERY specific complaints which cannot be defended by "I was acting in the interest of my client" and provable and documented.

The lawyer intimidated in me in a settlement conference or the hallway is meaningless, not provable and the lawyer can say "I really believed he was X"

In some cases, where there was a judicial sale of a home by bankruptcy lawyers tried to get colleagues to be managers of the home sale the judges ALWAYS say no because they say it is a conflict of interest and demeans the profession of the lawyer to be something like "money hungry".

You file a complaint against a lawyer, prepare to be called crazy....
Click to expand...

Documentation/Proof is key. If it's one thing I've learned thus far .. it's that.

The bullying in the hallways, etc was just for you guys on ODF. Definitely wouldn't complain about that stuff. I can't. No proof.

What I plan on doing when the time's right is making specific complaints with evidence of them which coincide with the Rules of professional ethics of the LSUC (I posted the link a few posts ago).

Some examples of documentation:

- E-mails threatening criminal court for falsifying e-mails. (I did not).
- Refusing to disclose (under rule 19/Form 20)
Instead passing around edited recordings to bias OCL
- Insinuating incest after an "XOXO" at end of e-mail to my mom
(right in court - transcripts. Judge was not content) - damaging stuff.
- Persistent with all allegations even after all disproved
(sexual, substance abuse, etc).
- Wrote that I couldn't see D3 on my birthday because I was probably out partying.
- Refusing a mutual disclosure meeting with OCL because "he didn't want to sit across from me". Instead scheduled one after the motion to sabotage the motion (and it did .. we adjourned).


These are just a few of the items that are documented.


- Threatening my job. (Now if he had just said this to me in the hallway I wouldn't complain - no poof). This was said to an officer of the court - my lawyer, during a meeting. She said she would write an affidavit if we were to pursue this.

There is a lot more. I'd be typing all day though.
 
My lawyer instructed me when he started to represent me that he would not allow anything in an affidavit from me that could not be corroborated by fact.

Had your ex's lawyer required the same from his client (irrefutable proof) you would not be in your current situation. If anything, your ex's lawyer has been in possession of documentation that you are not a drug/alcohol abuser. This, in itself is compelling evidence of his breach of professional conduct. When you are making your case with the law society I'd recommend only putting forward items which you can irrefutably prove (for example, documentation of service that the lawyer did indeed have the urinalysis).

Good for you for going through with this. Like everything else in life, documentation of bad behavior is important.
 
arabian said:
If anything, your ex's lawyer has been in possession of documentation that you are not a drug/alcohol abuser. This, in itself is compelling evidence of his breach of professional conduct.
.
Click to expand...
Yes. Good point. What proof has ex ever had that I was violent? I was denied access due to drugs/alcohol. What proof? When I gave proof I wasn't her lawyer simply said he didn't like all my modes of testing. I think I did every form of testing possible (liver enzymes, urinalysis, hair follicle and blood tests, including a complete toxicology from my family Dr).

Still .. no access. Then they had OCL spend her time verifying that all of these were supervised instead of interviewing important witnesses of mine, seeing how I was with D3, etc.

Now all this violence crap has been tossed as well. D3 was abducted and held for 3 months for what? I was supervised at 3 hours/day for what? She apparently didn't need proof. Nor does she have any consequences.

And the current system's okay with this somehow.

Gross.

Disturbing stuff.
 
Tort law in family law situations is iffy. I could be wrong but doesn't there have to be a 'measurable' loss?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top