Here's a new tidbit regarding Patrick Ross and his upcoming evisceration at Grande Prairie courthouse. While reading some Rule 4.33 rulings and appeals, I noticed that, occasionally, a Respondent tried to defend themselves by insisting that the Applicant had, in some vague and nebulous way, given them the impression that they had agreed to extend the time to litigate the underlying action. Put another way, the Rule 4.33 Respondent (in this case, Patrick) might argue, "Hey, CC published something that I interpreted as giving me more time!"
Except that it was only last month (June 19 blogpost) and before I ever knew of the existence of Alberta's "Drop Dead" Rule 4.33 that I very clearly warned Patrick of my intention to eventually deal with him:
That passage of mine cannot be misinterpreted -- it is clearly not gifting Patrick with a deadline extension of any kind, and just as clearly promises that I will be getting around to him and his stupid lawsuit at some point when I tire of him.
In short, any argument by Patrick that he thought I was giving him an extension is already dead in the water.
No comments:
Post a Comment