Chronicles of Twatrick: Patrick's immediate refiling problems.

While I wait for official service of Patrick's refiling of his now-dismissed 2022 lawsuit, it's worth summarizing the issues he will have to deal with before we even get into dealing with the (lack of) merit of this new action, much of it stemming from Patrick's many years of refusing to pay my original judgment, refusing to pay numerous cost awards, and refusing to obey court orders for well over a decade.

Let's start with the obvious fact that Patrick is trying to simply refile an action that was already tossed because Patrick was too arrogant and lazy to move it along, and I already showed that the Court is not impressed with that kind of behaviour:

 

 

Next, appreciate that the complaints in Patrick's dismissed lawsuit are now all at least four years old and out of time based on Alberta's limitations period. 

Patrick's next problem is whether he is even entitled to file lawsuits, being an undischarged bankrupt without a trustee who is years in arrears with the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy in terms of payments and reporting, and whose bankruptcy trustee discharged himself way back in February of 2014 due to Patrick's arrogant refusal to honour his legal obligations as a bankrupt.

Next, there is the fact that Patrick currently owes me over $125,000, and has made it clear that he has no intention of ever paying that; I'm fairly sure the Court will find that that factors into whether he should be allowed to file even more actions against me without clearing off his debt to me.

Finally(?), I can assure you that, when Patrick files that new action, I will file to require Patrick to put up significant security for costs so that, if I win, I will not have to chase him to collect my costs award. And given Patrick's long history of refusing to pay costs awards, I suspect I will have little trouble convincing the Court that Patrick needs to hand over a pile of money before any of this gets started.

So note well all of the roadblocks in Patrick's way -- it's not clear which issue I would choose to raise with the Court first, given that there are so many of them to choose from. And I suspect I haven't even listed them all. 

BONUS TRACK: Once again, I asked Google about the reality of refiling a lawsuit that was previously dismissed via Rule 4.33 and, while Google AI is not an official source of legislation, this summary is fairly savage about how difficult it is to do what Patrick is going to try:

 

 

And remember, that doesn't even take into account Patrick's history of refusing to pay court-ordered costs, and his massive debt to me.

TO SUMMARIZE, there are a number of grounds on which I can ask the Court to throw out Patrick's refiling of his now-dismissed lawsuit, only one of which has to succeed. The obvious order to argue these points would be:

1. It is nothing more than a refiling of his now-dead lawsuit, and we all know what the Court thinks of those (see above).
2. He is an undischarged bankrupt without a trustee and years in arrears with his obligations under bankruptcy, which should immediately disqualify him from filing anything.
3. He has a history of refusing to pay court-ordered costs and my judgment.
4. He currently owes me over $125,000 and has been found by more than one judge to be totally uninterested in paying off this debt.
5. In the alternative, if none of the above is persuasive, I can easily make the argument that, given Patrick's refusal to pay costs awards, he must put up significant security for costs before this refiling can continue.

I believe I can put all of the above in a single filing, and the Court is free to pick whichever argument they think is the most persuasive. Again, only one of those arguments has to convince the Court.