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.
13 comments:
What good would an extension even do??? There is sweet fuck all that Twatrick and his lawyer are gonna dig up in the way to claim some kind of advancement. This is as clear of a slam dunk as there has ever been legally speaking..He's toast!
Anon @ 3:56 AM: You and I and my regular readers here know all that because of the time I've taken to explain the legislation in exquisite detail. But as I have suggested earlier, I'm betting that Patrick has deliberately misrepresented this case to his lawyer, and given his lawyer an inappropriately optimistic take on this.
I could be wrong -- perhaps Patrick's new lawyer *realizes* how hopeless this is, but he's going to represent his client to the best of his ability. Personally, I think that lawyer is going to be unpleasantly sandbagged over the next couple of days when learning how he's been misled. But that's just a guess.
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?
Even if you don't agree to an extension, can't opposing counsel ask the Court to grant that? I'm sure he would ask if you don't agree.
Anon @ 6:08 AM: I suspect that Patrick's lawyer can ask the Court for whatever he wants, but if shows up at the hearing asking for an extension, I will make sure the Court understands that, after being served on July 15, Patrick fucked around and wasted a month before getting a lawyer, while continuing to talk shit about me on Twitter. So I don't see why the Court should accommodate Patrick's laziness and arrogance.
Patrick was served with my Application a month ago, and he chose to ignore it until late last week. Why should the Court protect Patrick from the consequences of his stupidity? At least that's the argument I would make.
I don't understand why, if Patrick now has a lawyer, that lawyer doesn't just tell Patrick to drop the lawsuit and make a reasonable settlement offer for your costs. Surely any competent lawyer would look at the facts here, realize that Patrick has no chance of winning, and strongly advise Patrick to cut his losses and get out and offer to pay you a majority of your costs just to get this over with.
If this continues and goes to a hearing, then not only will Patrick have to cover most (if not all) of your even-higher costs, he'll be increasing his own legal fees as well. How does that make any sense when it's clear he's going to lose? What is he trying to prove?
Anon @ 10:48 AM: Given that Patrick finally has adult supervision, I am as baffled as you are as to why he insists on dragging this out. The only thing I can think of is what I suggested earlier -- I think that Patrick has deliberately misled his new lawyer about the facts of this case, leading his lawyer to conclude (erroneously) that Patrick has a realistic chance of winning. (I wonder if Patrick's new lawyer has even *read* Patrick's original Statement of Claim to truly appreciate what total garbage it is.)
Other than this admitted speculation, I can't begin to imagine what Patrick and his lawyer are thinking here.
@Anon @ 10:48AM: at a guess, the lawyer has taken this on to provide Patrick with reasonable representation - a fair ethical position to take as a lawyer. He may well be doing what he can to mitigate whatever self-inflicted damage Patrick has created through his actions / inaction to this point in time. In this respect the situation is similar to a criminal defence lawyer's role, even when he knows that their client has little or no chance of successfully being acquitted - they still do what they can to defend their client's interests.
As CC has pointed out in numerous posts over the last several weeks, even if Patrick were to drop the lawsuit, he's still in a pretty ugly place regarding costs etc.
Patrick's counsel may well have NOT provided an opinion on the merits of the underlying lawsuit at this time, as given the motion before the courts does not engage with the issues raised in the suit itself. He may also be keeping that opinion to himself until such times as the current matters are resolved ... and only providing that opinion if it is asked for.
Perhaps it's the delayed process he dellights in. Thinking he has some sort of control doing it the long and hard way.
Pat is about to hit a brick wall and court costs will be awarded after his smack down by a judge.
But I'm not going to hold my breath that you'll see that money any time soon.
If only he can delay enough that the separatists win the referendum. They probably promised to repudiate his debts with a Royal Pardon. You do understand the separatists do not want a democracy, they want an absolute monarchy.
Lawyer or...
Guru?
Honestly. What kind of real lawyer wouldn't see through his bullshit?
Have you checked out Patrick on Twitter the last couple days? He's melted down completely, screaming about Charlie Kirk and Candace Owens. You think he'd have more important things to do, like consulting with his lawyer about Thursday's hearing. I bet his lawyer is really regretting accepting this lunatic as a client.
Speculation here: PR has grasped that if he just doesn't show up it'll look bad. But if he showed up by himself he'll be humiliated. Perhaps he's thinking that hiring a lawyer to represent him means that he can be a no-show while still appearing to respect the process, thus mitigating the Court's disgust with him.
Post a Comment