Chronicles of Twatrick: No, he can't play games with Rule 4.33.

Anonymous commenter on previous post asks, if Patrick's dumbass 2022 defamation lawsuit against me is kicked to the curb for inordinate delay via Alberta's "Drop Dead" Rule 4.33, does he have the freedom to simply refile it?

Google AI says not likely, due to simple deadlines:

So Patrick is still totally and utterly screwed.

Are you not entertained? 

P.S. It's going on five days since I posted about using Alberta's Rule 4.33 against Patrick Ross' meritless lawsuit against me and, in an unusual development, Patrick has been absolutely silent about this over at his Twitter account. This is very unlike Patrick, who delights in bla-har-har-ing everyone and everything and proclaiming his legal acumen and how he is "winning" at all of this. 

One wonders what is keeping Patrick from mocking all of this. 

OH, DEAR ... one of my loyal followers gifts me with this screenshot of Patrick from a recent YouTube video:

 

 

I can attest that it is unaltered and unretouched. It may be childish to fat-shame someone, but given Patrick's years of mocking others online for a variety of reasons, this seems only fair.

Chronicles of Twatrick: The terror of Rule 4.33.

And just because I feel like it, I will again explain how utterly screwed is Lloydminster's village idiot and resident bankrupt Patrick Ross, now that I have filed a Rule 4.33 Application in the Grande Prairie, Alberta courthouse, the effect being that that will kick his asinine lawsuit against me to the curb for lack of significant advancement.

You can review the previous blog post to get the details but let's sum it up: If a Plaintiff in Alberta files a civil suit, then proceeds to not move it along in any meaningful or significant way for a three-year period, the Defendant can file a Rule 4.33 Application to have it dismissed, at which point (subject to very stringent exceptions) the court is required to dismiss the action. The court has no discretion, it must automatically dismiss the action under this Rule.

Once again, Google AI does a nice job of showing how simple and how unforgiving is Rule 4.33:

Note how the overview above confirms what I just said:

• The three year deadline is non-negotiable.
• It is the Plaintiff's responsibility to move the case along.
• The advancement must be meaningful and significant; minor filings or unproductive settlement talks don't count.
• Frantic scrambling at the deadline does not make up for three years of lack of activity.

As you can see, Rule 4.33 has little sympathy for a Plaintiff like Patrick who files frivolous, vexatious garbage, then just lets it sit year after year so he can brag about how he is suing someone. And there's nothing he can do about it now that my filing is in. So what are Patrick's options? Limited, to put it mildly.

First, I will win this application -- it is the closest thing to a legal no-brainer slam dunk as you are ever likely to see. It is the textbook definition of what Rule 4.33 was meant to deal with, and it will deal with it.

I will also get costs ... how much remains to be seen but it will be at least partial indemnity, and I will be arguing for full indemnity given Patrick's frivolous filing and abuse of process (the fact that he has bragged about this on Twitter while refusing to move it along for three years is not going to sit well with the court). But there's one more thing.

Given that Patrick filed his dumbass lawsuit at the Grande Prairie courthouse, and that's where I filed my Rule 4.33 application, I will be insisting that he appear in person (unlike last time, where he called in via Zoom, for which the judge made it clear he was unhappy about that and told Patrick he was expected to attend in person).

So, yes, I will be making a full-throated argument that Patrick needs to be there in person, at which time there might be a surprise or two waiting for him at the courthouse. More than that, I cannot say at the moment, but if anyone thinks I am exaggerating or embellishing any of this, they are free to do their own research to understand how Rule 4.33 works, and how it has precious little patience with vexatious litigants like Patrick.

More to come as it happens. 

BONUS TRACK: Anonymous commenter asks whether Lord Baron Twatrick von Loadenhosen can salvage his ridiculous lawsuit against me by arguing about its underlying merit. No, and let's let Google AI once again drive this home:

 

I hope that answers that question. Still more to come, just not right this minute.

RANDOM THOUGHT ... it just occurred to me that explaining all this Rule 4.33 stuff in excruciating detail is going to cause real problems for Patrick when this goes in front of a judge. As we all know, Patrick follows this blog and loves to publish snarky comments about what he reads here over on his Twitter account, and here's why that's going to get him in trouble.

If Patrick comments on, say, this post, I can use that as evidence that he's read it and, furthermore, that he now knows that the merit (actually, the embarrassing lack thereof) of his lawsuit is of no relevance to a Rule 4.33 Application. Which means that if he tries that argument in front of a judge, I'll immediately argue that Patrick is wasting the court's time since he is already aware that the underlying merit does not matter.

In short, I would ask my loyal and long-suffering followers to keep a close watch on Patrick's "outlawtory" Twitter account and to take screenshots of anything he publishes related to these most recent blog posts so that I can use that as evidence that he reads my blog and that he should therefore understand how Rule 4.33 works and that the court should have little patience with meaningless arguments.

Yeah, it's time to use Patrick's snotty arrogance against him. 

Chronicles of Twatrick: Hammer to fall.

For those who have been following this meandering saga for years, let it be known that the hammer is finally about to fall on massively-indebted undischarged bankrupt and financial fugitive Patrick "Super Quintuple Nexus Threat High School Chick Magnet Quadruple Chin" Ross, as I have just had confirmed my filing at the Grande Prairie courthouse of my Rule 4.33 Application. This is colloquially known as Alberta's "Drop Dead Rule," and it is going to put an end to Patrick Ross' idiotic defamation lawsuit against me once and for all.

The idea behind Alberta's Rule 4.33 is nad-grindingly simple -- if the Plaintiff (that would be Patrick) files a civil action, then at some point proceeds to do nothing with it for three straight years, then upon a Rule 4.33 application by the Defendant (me), the Court is required to dismiss the action. Required. This is not discretionary for the Court, it's mandatory. The Court has no choice but to kick the lawsuit to the curb. This applies exactly to this case as Patrick filed his meritless dumbfuck stupidity in August of 2022, and the last activity of any kind was in December 2022. That's more than three years, which means Patrick's lawsuit is toast.

Lest you think I exaggerate or embellish, here is Google AI's devastatingly accurate characterization of that Rule:

 

 

Let me expand on the above so you can truly appreciate how Patrick is absolutely fucked here. (That scrabbling sound you hear is Patrick frantically Googling "Rule 4.33".)

First, you can see in the opening paragraph above the hard three-year deadline related to the application, which does not actually require no activity for three years, simply "no significant advancement" of the file. What this means (and has been affirmed several times by Alberta courts) is that even if you did some stuff during those three years, unless it represented actually moving the case along toward a resolution, it doesn't count. In Patrick's case, there was literally no activity whatsoever. Not just nothing significant ... nothing at all. None. Zilch. Sweet fuck all. So Patrick has definitely blown that three-year deadline.

If you read further, there are a small number of exceptions under which the Court will not dismiss an action under Rule 4.33 -- I can assure you that absolutely none of them apply here so there is nothing that will save Patrick in any way. So let me say this again -- now that I've filed my Rule 4.33 Application, there is absolutely nothing Patrick can do to stop it. (If you don't believe me, do your own research, then come back and tell me if I've misrepresented anything.) But we're not done yet.

You see, a successful Rule 4.33 applicant (again, me) will be entitled to costs. And how much costs? I'm glad you asked, so I asked Google about this, and here is the AI output:

 

 

Note how costs would normally be partial indemnity, unless ... yeah ... unless the Plaintiff's behaviour was "reprehensible, scandalous or outrageous", and if the opposing party's conduct is seen as "an abuse of process." Do you think it will be difficult to demonstrate Patrick's bad faith in filing such a frivolous and meritless lawsuit? I don't. And I will be strenuously arguing for full costs based on Patrick's online behaviour in the last three years (all of which I have been screenshotting for just this occasion).

In fact, it gets even worse for Patrick but I will keep that to myself for now. In closing, you are all welcome to check into Alberta's Rule 4.33 to satisfy yourself that, now that my Application has been filed, there is absolutely nothing Patrick can do to defeat it, and the Court will be required to dismiss his idiocy, and award me costs.

The irony, of course, is that Patrick filing a worthless lawsuit, then just sitting on it for years so he could keep bragging about it while refusing to move it forward, is exactly why he is now so screwed.

P.S. If any of my loyal fans are so inclined, you are welcome to bring this new development to Patrick's attention any way you wish (Twitter account "outlawtory", email address "dragonfireideas@gmail.com"). I suspect Patrick will desperately want to blar-har-har all of this on social media, but that will only prove he's now aware of it, which will make service so much simpler.

He really is utterly screwed.

BONUS TRACK: Oh, my, poor Patrick just buried himself even deeper with this idiotic tweet, proving that he follows this blog, which is not going to end well for him in court.

 

MORE AFTERSNARK: Appreciate if you will the irony in Patrick describing his pet lawsuit as "extremely-meritorious." One wonders if, after he does his research, he will realize that Rule 4.33 applications are purely and solely time-based; the merit (or lack thereof) of the underlying action being dismissed for long delay is totally irrelevant. That is, while Patrick's lawsuit is definitely absolute garbage, it wouldn't make the slightest difference if it wasn't.

Chronicles of Twatrick: The spoliation.

Oh, dear ... undischarged bankrupt and massively indebted Patrick Ross has been a bad boy lately, in that he has been quietly deleting numerous tweets in which he was gleefully bragging about his spectacularly meritless lawsuit against me. I'm not sure why he thought this would protect him as I have announced publicly on a number of occasions that I was taking screenshots.

Witness, for example, this single screenshot from a while back searching for the words "day" and "lawsuit" among the rest of the childish spewage over at Patrick's Twitter account:

 

 And today, given exactly the same search parameters:

 

Oh, yes, Patrick has been busy frantically deleting the evidence of his bad faith. One wonders what part of "I have been taking screenshots" Patrick did not understand.

My lawyer is going to have a field day with this. More to come.

IT GETS FUNNIER: Apparently, the search feature on Twitter is magnificently broken so that it can't even satisfy trivial requests, prompting lifelong bankrupt Twatrick von Loadenhosen to complain thusly:

 

This is actually funnier since it shows that Patrick is eminently proud of his production of bragging about his lawsuit, even as he refused to move it forward. I'm glad he cleared that up for me -- it's legally really helpful.

Stay tuned. 

Chronicles of Twatrick: So what's Patrick up to these days?

For reasons I will not get into yet, I'm curious as to precisely where Patrick is hanging out these days. Is he crashing in the basement at Casa Ross now that sister Penny appears to have moved in? And, more importantly, it would be useful to know where he's working at the moment.

Any info along those lines (possibly accompanied by legally-taken pics) appreciated.

P.S. I had, for a while, wondered why that hovel had not gone on the market, since I naturally assumed the will stipulated that it would be sold and proceeds split among the squalling siblings. But from what I hear, one of the needier siblings has moved in, and that makes sense, but it also means that Patrick still has no actual residence (apart from perhaps living in the basement). So what is Patrick's official "residence" from a legal perspective? That is, what is his proper address for legal service? And if it's not Casa Ross, is Patrick technically homeless?

So many questions. 

Chronicles of Twatrick: Inspector Clouseau, not Sherlock Holmes.

I am reminded of this spewage from Patrick "Three chins and growing" Ross who, back in 2023, freaked out over someone allegedly taking pictures around Casa Ross, then bragging that he had "a lead" and was likely to make an apprehension sometime soon.

 

This, of course, never happened. And I'm guessing Patrick is still waiting for that apology.

Chronicles of Twatrick: Happy interestversary!

Yes, only two days after the 45th birthday of undischarged bankrupt and financial fugitive perpetually looking over his shoulder Patrick Ross, it is now a full 58 months since a judge paddled Patrick's voluminous backside, told him how much he owed me and cranked up the interest rate on that debt to a delicious five per cent:

 

 

And given Patrick's refusal to co-operate or make any payments on his rapidly-increasing debt to me, we're now looking at over $125,000. And now on to a couple bits of somewhat new business.

In an earlier comment, some anonymous regular opined on the stupidity of Patrick, who could have simply accepted his 2014 bankruptcy Conditional Discharge Order (CDO) of $200 per month for 14 years, because that's a pretty meagre monthly payment and he would have been almost done by now. Uh, it's worse than that.

You see, while that was indeed the terms of the CDO, the CDO also stated that as long as Patrick made those payments religiously for the first three years, he had the option of paying off the entire outstanding balance after that. That's right -- while paying a paltry $200 per month for three years, Patrick could have been stashing away enough to be able to wipe out the remaining approximately $27,000 in one shot, meaning Patrick could have been out of bankruptcy free and clear almost a decade ago. As we all know, however, Patrick's arrogance simply would not allow him to pay me anything, since he would see that as a sign of defeat, which is why he's in the legal and financial bottomless well he is. But it's worse than that.

While I was originally the primary creditor in Patrick's bankruptcy -- and thus would have received most of that $34,000 -- given Patrick's refusal to follow the rules, I filed successfully to have his protection of bankruptcy lifted with respect to me, which means that my original judgment against Patrick of $85,000 was now back in force (as a regular debt not related to bankruptcy). However, while Patrick now owes me over $125,000, he is still bankrupt and is still required to fulfill the terms of his CDO to get out of bankruptcy, which means (and I have confirmed this with his former trustee) that Patrick will still have to pay the outstanding balance related to his CDO (about $25,000) to get out of bankruptcy, but whether or not he does that would not affect in any way the money he owes me. (I was also told that if Patrick does that, most of that money would likely go to me, anyway.) But let's get to the last issue for today.

As y'all know, Patrick's gaggle of hillbilly siblings had an estate sale last weekend, where they tried desperately to unload such cultural treasures as his late mom's complete set of "Joanie Loves Chachi" collector plates and his dad's velvet Elvis paintings and Dale Earnhardt replica NASCAR trophies. This suggests that, maybe, just maybe, those yokels are preparing to put Casa Ross on the market, which is why I'm going to ask my network of spies and confidential informants to be particularly vigilant and watch Casa Ross for, say, a "For Sale" sign going up, whereupon I will leap into action and ... well, I'll keep that to myself for now. But I'd appreciate my elves being especially observant regarding any sudden changes around Casa Ross and letting me know immediately.

Apart from all of this, I think we're done here. For now.

BONUS TRACK: Since Patrick is currently gloating about how he "defeated" me in court on one occasion due to his self-educated boy lawyer brilliance, it's worth reproducing the final part of a judge's decision related to Patrick when he filed, objecting to my application to register my 2010 Ontario judgment in Saskatchewan for the purpose of initiating collection proceedings against him.

Patrick chose to write and file that objection all on his own, and his childish, grievance-laden response was so utterly nonsensical and detached from reality that ... well, I will let J. McMurtry have the last word:

 

It's one thing to have the court rule against you; it's quite another to get spanked that savagely for submitting juvenile bullshit.

MORE BONUS: At some point, when I grow weary of it, I will file to have Patrick's meritless 2022 defamation lawsuit against me dismissed as abandoned, and the beauty of that is that I will be able to use an earlier ruling against Patrick as my legal precedent. Recall that back here, I reproduced the relevant part of a ruling wherein a judge found that the three-and-a-half year delay associated with Patrick's appeal of his 2014 Conditional Discharge Order was both inordinate and inexcusable, which is all that is required to have the court toss a legal action. Let's explain that in a bit more detail.

To find that a delay was "inordinate" simply means that it was stupidly and inappropriately long; in Patrick's case, the judge found that three and a half years was silly given that his appeal was effectively ready to go back in 2014. In addition, the delay must be "inexcusable"; that is, even if the delay was inordinate, perhaps you have an excuse like you were locked in an ICE detention centre all that time. Again, the judge found that Patrick had no plausible excuse for dragging his ass for that long.

And given that Patrick's current lawsuit against me was filed in August of 2022, we are now approaching four years of delay, which means I can take the above ruling, put it in front of a judge, and say nothing more than, "The court already found inordinate and inexcusable delay in that case; this case is equivalent and even more egregious." That really should be the extent of it, and it's unlikely that Patrick is going to attempt to move this case along at any time since he knows full well that, if this gets to court, there will likely be other parties waiting for him.

In short, when I file to dismiss this idiocy of Patrick's, I will need to say little more than, "I already have solid legal precedent for this." And that lawsuit will be dismissed as abandoned. And I will be awarded costs.

Sometimes, Patrick is not the sharpest sandwich in the picnic basket. 

Chronicles of Twatrick: Legal victory, you say? I think not.

One of my reliable sources informs me that, yet again, undischarged bankrupt and man whistling past the graveyard Patrick "Super Nexus Chick Magnet Quintuple Threat" Ross is bragging about how he "defeated" me in a court hearing a few years back. I've explained what happened in that hearing at least a couple of times but, what the heck, here's the definitive overview so you know what actually took place.

Not long after Patrick filed his monumentally meritless and frivolous defamation lawsuit against me in mid-2022 (a filing for which he now refuses to proceed), I decided to try to file -- on my own -- a motion to have that action dismissed for a number of reasons. I've already pointed out how absurd it was (Patrick whining about stuff that happened as far back as 2008), but the salient feature was that, in a bout of over-confidence, I decided that I was smart enough to file that motion myself.

So I did.

Predictably, because I had little experience in representing myself in legal matters, I filed a notably deficient motion -- I simply did not reference everything I needed to reference. And at the hearing, the judge diplomatically pointed this out and explained that he could not rule on a motion that was not properly drawn up, and that was the end of that (although, curiously, the judge even said that it looked like I had a pretty strong case but, still, he could not proceed). End of hearing. So let's make sure you understand what happened there.

I did not "lose" that hearing, and Patrick did not "win" that hearing, for the simple reason that there was no hearing. The judge did not hear arguments from either Patrick or myself, and did not rule on the merits of the arguments -- he simply said that there was not enough in my filing to proceed, and ended those proceedings. No one won, and no one lost, and I have the right to refile that motion any time I want. So, no, Patrick, did not "win" that hearing. But if Patrick wants to compare legal victories, let's start a list:

• I sued Patrick for malicious defamation and won a judgment of $85,000.
• I forced Patrick into court on numerous occasions during which he was found in contempt of court twice.
• I drove Patrick into personal bankruptcy.
• At Patrick's bankruptcy discharge hearing, I successfully argued that he was not entitled to an absolute discharge.
• After Patrick filed a defective appeal of his bankruptcy Conditional Discharge Order, I successfully filed to have that appeal dismissed as abandoned.
• I successfully filed to have Patrick's protection under bankruptcy lifted with respect to me so that his original judgment amount was reinstated (with interest).
• I successfully registered my judgment in Saskatchewan so that I could initiate collection proceedings against Patrick.

So if Patrick wants to keep bragging about a "victory" for which there was no actual hearing, good for him. I'll compare that with my basketful of victories any time. 

P.S. Just to be clear, because my motion was never actually "heard" and ruled upon, I have every right to re-file it whenever I want. Which is why I'm making a record of every time Patrick yaps on about me -- so that when I do that re-filing and Patrick whines that he's been too busy to proceed with his idiotic action, I have a binderful of him having enough time to talk smack about me.