Chronicles of Twatrick: Three days and counting.

Rule 4.33 "Drop Dead" Application still on schedule for this coming Thursday at 10 a.m. (Grande Prairie, AB time) and stunningly lazy and arrogant Plaintiff Patrick Ross, via his freshly-acquired lawyer, has officially requested an extension in order to prepare the Response Affidavit he's had more than a month to draft and serve.

Fuck, no, for a couple of reasons.

First, as I just mentioned, since Patrick was served with my Application more than a month ago (July 15, to be precise), he has -- rather than getting to work on that Affidavit -- been insulting me on social media, so I'm not in a particularly accommodating mood.

More to the point, it's not clear what Patrick's lawyer would do with extra time since, as I have pointed out more times than is probably healthy, Patrick has no defense. None. Zip. Nada. Sweet fuck all. Here's a summary from the above link:

 

 

and I can assure you that there is nothing there that will rescue Patrick, who has now spent the last four years since filing his asinine lawsuit against me doing absolutely nothing to move it along, but did take the time to occasionally brag about it (even as he failed to move it along):

 

 

So, no, I'm not feeling in a generous mood and there will be no extension. Let's get into court and get this done.

And for some thigh-slapping entertainment value, here's what Patrick wrote in a letter to my lawyer just after being served with my Application:

 

That would be Patrick, snickering over my apparent need for adult supervision by hiring a lawyer, shortly before he frantically retained his own lawyer less than a week before the scheduled hearing. How droll.

SPECULATION: If Patrick was still running the show over there, I would speculate that a defense he might try would be to find something I posted on social media and deliberately misrepresent it as my somehow allowing Patrick more time for his lawsuit.

Sadly for Patrick, it was only two months ago (June 19 of this year) that I specifically published a warning that I was running out of patience with him and was ready to file a dismissal motion against his stupid lawsuit:

 

 

There is no possibility of misinterpretation here -- I am clearly warning Patrick of my potential plans so he should have taken that seriously. He chose not to, and here we are.

A GOOD QUESTION: Last commenter asks:

"Do you think Patrick told his new lawyer about this blog and all the posts you've written about him and this case over the last few weeks? Do you think he would try to use that as part of a defense?"

What an interesting question. First, I think that if Patrick was still representing himself, he would absolutely try to make my recent blog posts part of his Rule 4.33 defense; I suspect he would insist that all of this was "harassment" and "intimidation" and was "deleterious" to his ability to defend himself. In fact, he tried this a few years ago when I filed to have his bankruptcy ruling appeal dismissed as abandoned due to inordinate and inexcusable delay.

Patrick tried that sob story on the judge back then, who was having none of it:

 

 

So Patrick has a history of being a childish whiner. But he would have a couple problems with this strategy in these more recent circumstances.

First, what I choose to blog about is my business, and in no way prevents Patrick from moving his case forward. None of my blogging impedes Patrick from advancing his case, and none of it represents harassment or intimidation.

A bigger problem for Patrick is that a Rule 4.33 Application deals exclusively with a lack of activity for a case prior to the filing of the Application. Nothing I've done since then can be incorporated into Patrick's defense, so any references to what I've blogged since July 15 are not in the smallest way relevant to a defense for Patrick.

As for Patrick whining to his new lawyer about these last few weeks of blogging, he's invited to let him know for all I care.