Filed/Served (pdf) Fresh A-A Statement of Claim                                 CV-22-00089804-0000

Filed/Served Fresh Claim – online version with some links to evidence

Books of Documents: #1   #2   #3   #4                    


ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

b e t w e e n

 

Deirdre Moore   (plaintiff)

and

Addelman Baum Gilbert Robinson LLP   (defendant)

Snir Law Office   (defendant)

FACTUM

SET ASIDE DEFAULT vs. PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

pdf version – REDACTED

link to evidence-laden Affidavit #1  ||  insert link to Interview with James Scott MacKillop re: level 4-5 Sociopaths  ||  link to evidence-laden Affidavit #2

 


This Factum is part of my response to Nelligan Payne O’Brien’s Motion to have Shyster Addelman’s Notice of Motion to Set Aside Default … with costs  

BACKGROUND

  1. x
  2. x
  3. x
  4. x
    1. y
    2. y
    3. y
      1. the OPSB
      2. the OCA and
      3. the SCJ

 


CONTENT TO BE EDITED OR MOVED TO AFFIDAVIT #2

     Pursuant to Rule 19.04(1), where a defendant has been noted in default (see confirmation of requisition filed at Appendix A), the plaintiff may require the registrar to sign judgment against the defendants in respect of a claim for:

      1. a debt or liquidated demand in money, including interest if claimed in the statement of claim,
      2. the recovery of possession of land,
      3. the recovery of possession of personal property or
      4. foreclosure, sale or redemption of a mortgage.

BACKGROUND

      1. Following years of severe domestic violence of all forms that did not leave any visible bruises, in 2019 the plaintiff (“Moore”) agreed to the placement of a lien on her matrimonial home in order to retain the Addelman and Snir in good faith.
      1. Moore believed that Addelman and Snir would protect the interests of her and her two children, Sean and Cate Kiska, as she continued to endure the never-ending, toxic from an individual, John Kiska (“Kiska”) who had effectively weaponized:
        1. the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa,
        2. the Office of the Children’s Lawyer (“OCL”),
        3. the Ottawa Police Services Board,
        4. Ottawa’s Crown Attorney’s Office,
        5. the Ontario Court of Justice (Criminal Division) and
        6. the Superior Court of Justice  (Family court)

as well as multiple accomplices operating as lawyers and legal assistants within the firm Wade Smith LLP.

      1. They knew that:
        1. the 2018 OCL investigation resulted in a recommendation that Moore receive sole custody of her children (see excerpt from OCL report at Appendix B) and
        2. she had received permission to seek damages for Kiska’s multiple torts and crimes in a family court setting (see details from the Ottawa Citizen at Appendix C).
      1. Instead, however, the defendants assisted the plaintiff’s estranged spouse via multiple forms of deceit, negligence, defamation and collusion: they were merely posing as legitimate legal counsel when, in fact, they were merely part of Ottawa’s network of taxpayer-funded organized crime. (See over-simplified illustration of this network at Appendix D and more details by scrolling through various portions of pfi.ROCKS).
      1. Now that the so-called “child protection” matter has concluded, Moore is finally in a position to re-initiate the divorce proceedings and attempt to rescue her children via the protections provided by Canada’s Divorce Act which requires the judge to consider domestic violence—including but not limited to financial abuse and psychological abuse—when determining parenting time and decision making.
      1. In other words, Kiska’s ability to circumvent the Divorce Act by exploiting Ontario’s Child, Youth and Family Services Act (“CYFSA”), the Criminal Code of Canada and the multiple career criminals that have infiltrated those aspects of the legal/judicial system has run its course: Moore literally could not have more evidence of Kiska’s wickedness. (see partial, currently-under-investigation, police complaint at Appendix E and work-in-progress, evidence-laden testimony at pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/john-kiska).
      1. Accordingly, Moore would like to be in a position to retain a legitimate family law lawyer so that she can:
        1. rescue her children from Kiska’s years of psychological and emotional abuse,
        2. receive the hundreds of thousands of dollars in retroactive financial support and occupational rent owed to her since 2016 and
        3. finally divorce Kiska after 10 years of system-enabled torture.

SUMMARY

      1. In other words:
        1. Ordering the removal of the $250,000 lien (see Appendix F) on Moore’s $1,000,000+ matrimonial home (see MPAC statement at Appendix G) would enable her to seek/retain reputable legal counsel.
        2. In the alternative, ordering the removal of Addelman from the lien and a reduction in Snir’s amount to $18,435 + GST (i.e. the amount of Snir’s scandalous invoice—see Appendix Hless the charge of $60,000 highlighted on page 11 that Snir self-triggered via an illegally-obtained court order using a Family court motion (see Appendix I) or less could assist Moore to access some form of justice. Considering the degree of severity of errors, omissions and malicious obfuscation contained in Snir’s 2020 motion materials in order to trigger his scandalous $60,000 fee, this is not an unreasonable request.
        3. At a minimum, simply ordering the removal of Addelman from the lien would be a step in the right direction as, clearly, Moore never needed a defence attorney in the first place: all but one of the bogus criminal charges were dropped in 2022 and Moore was simply extorted into agreeing to an unlawful Probation Order (see Appendix J) which did nothing but:
          1. further torture Moore,
          2. further enable Kiska’s ongoing child abuse and 
          3. evidence Taxpayer-funded Domestic Violence and Child Abuse (“#TDVCA”). (See pinned tweet at: https://twitter.com/CaeJak/).

REGARDING THE REQUIREMENT OF RULE 19.04(2)(a)

      1. According to Rule 19.04(2), before the signing of default judgment, the plaintiff shall file with the registrar a requisition for default judgment:
        1. stating that the claim comes within the class of cases for which default judgment may properly be signed;
        2. stating whether there has been any partial payment of the claim and setting out the date and amount of any partial payment;
        3. where the plaintiff has claimed prejudgment interest in the statement of claim, setting out how the interest is calculated;
        4. where the plaintiff has claimed post-judgment interest in the statement of claim at a rate other than as provided in section 129 of the Courts of Justice Act, setting out the rate; and
        5. stating whether the plaintiff wishes costs to be fixed by the registrar or assessed. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 19.04 (2)
      1. Default judgment for the removal and/or reduction in the lien against Moore’s matrimonial home comes within the class of cases for which default judgment may properly be signed as it represents a recovery of possession of land and a recovery of possession of property, Rule 19.04(1) b and c, respectively. (See copy of deed at Appendix K).
      1. Removal and/or reduction of the exorbitant lien represents only a fraction of Moore’s Civil Action and does not evidence Snir’s nor Addelman’s guilt: it merely enables Moore to seek the justice in Family and Criminal court that was rendered impossible by the actions and inactions of Snir and Addelman in the first instance—see paragraph 55 of Fresh Statement of Claim at Appendix L (or, at https://pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/cv-22-89804_fresh-amended-amended-statement-of-claim_saqotu) and paragraph c in 20210707 letter from subsequent defence attorney at Appendix M.
      1. To date, Addelman has never submitted any invoice to Moore for any payment despite his release early in 2020: this defendant is either incredibly deficient in accounts receivable or was already paid directly by either Moore’s estranged ex or one of his many accomplices including, but not limited to, Crown prosecutor Malcolm Savage (“Savage”). (See e-mail from Kiska to Savage at Appendix N and work-in-progress victim impact statements at pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/john-kiska) and pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/malcolm-savage, respectively.)
      1. It was not until December 28, 2022, that Snir delivered his bill for $88,631.55—see Appendix O—which included his self-triggered “charge” for $60,000 (as discussed at paragraph 8 b) above, a redacted version of which is also available here: https://pfi.rocks/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/20230330-REQUISITION-for-Summary-Judgment-Snir-Addelman-REDACTED.pdf.
      1. This, despite Moore’s multiple requests that the defendants remove the lien from her home for two years—one example included at Appendix P and all of which went unanswered by both of them.
      1. Similar to Addelman, Moore submits that Snir is either incredibly deficient in accounts receivable or was already paid directly by Kiska or one of his many accomplices including, but not limited to, the Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa (“CAS”) Executive Director Kelly Raymond (“Raymond”). (see pages 2-3 of Appendix Q, another “smoking gun” that exposes Kiska’s collusion with the CAS to torture Moore and her children, as well as links to evidence provided on page 1 of Appendix Q.  >>> This evidence cannot be published online as evidence of crime committed by the CAS and various CAS-related crooked judges has been illegally criminalized via an illegally-obtained, unlawful probation order extorted by Crown’s Mike Boyce (“Boyce”) and secured by another “defence attorney”, Alyssa Jervis. See order at Criminal Justice-NL Style <<<

REGARDING THE REQUIREMENT OF RULE 19.04(2)(b)-(e)

      1. There has not been any partial payment of the claim or setting out of any date, amount or partial payment.
      1. Moore has not claimed any prejudgment interest; although, she probably should have.
      1. Moore has not claimed post-judgment interest in her statement of claim, which was an oversight.
      1. Wishing to evidence how courts in Ottawa have been weaponized to reward criminals, Moore is not interested in fixing costs at this time.

CONTINUED TORTIOUS AND CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BY ADDELMAN & ITS LAWYERS

      1. Since realizing that they have been noted in default pursuant to Rule 19.01(1), Moore has received from Addelman:
        1. a threat of Extortion from one of Addelman’s lawyers—Craig O’Brien of Nelligan LLP[1] (“Nelligan”), see Appendix R—as defined in S. 346(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada (“CCC”) as:

Every one commits extortion who, without reasonable justification or excuse and with intent to obtain anything, by threats, accusations, menaces or violence induces or attempts to induce any person, whether or not he is the person threatened, accused or menaced or to whom violence is shown, to do anything or cause anything to be done.

Moore submits that:

        1.  she was under no obligation to further the delay this action simply because two law firms are unable to follow the Rules of Civil procedure to produce a Statement of Defence within the times prescribed,
        2. revolving vacations do not constitute “reasonable justification or excuse” and render extortion legal,
        3. Addelman is simply employing stalling tactics used by all lawyers including, but not limited to, the ones used by:
          • Paule Kemgni (“Kemgni”) (who claims to be waiting on her own hospital files to proceed—see pages 1-3 of Appendix S),even though she had them over a year ago in order to illegally-obtain a $10,000 cost award and change of jurisdiction! (see both Orders obtained by another evidence-ignoring judge at pages 3-6 of Appendix T with some details of that scandalous event linked here: https://pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/paule-kemgni and more court-related documents stored here: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4q0ihecap4kk4il/AADiu9Zuj3DjSPXkOnGAxKn9a?dl=0.
          • Victor Vallance Blais LLP (“Blais”)—who received a ridiculous decision from another crooked Judge Sally Gomery (“Gomery”)—that implied Blais’ “advice” could somehow benefit Moore and her children (see page 1 of Appendix U and some of the related evidence available here: https://pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/sally-gomery) should she ever be able to successfully divorce Kiska! Moore hasn’t seen her children in over four years![2] and
          • multiple more Kiska legal-related accomplices who benefitted from the theft of all of her and her children’s possessions during a 2019 eviction scam but had another judge in their back pocket: decision yet to be appealed but partial details available at https://pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/ryan-bell.
        4. As Kiska again ceased paying his illegally-obtained (some details available at https://pfi.rocks/organized-crime/vis/julie-audet), below-poverty-level, fraudulent, court-ordered financial support of $1,230/month in January 2023, Moore has been forced to apply for social assistance (see Appendix W) in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (“NL”): further weaponization of the court processes by Kiska’s accomplices in Ontario (“ON”) that unnecessarily penalizes both NL and ON taxpayers as Moore enters her tenth year attempting to divorce Kiska is intentional as they would all prefer that she, ideally, commit suicide or, in the alternative, end up living on the streets.

b. a Statement of Defence dated March 30, 2023 (see Appendix X) without Moore’s consent which:

        1.  violates Rules 19.01(5) and 19.02(1)(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure in Ontario’s Courts of Justice Act (“CJA”) and thereby
        2. evidences the commission of two counts of Disobey a Statute, S. 126 of the CCC;
        3. evidences Nelligan’s willingness to be an Accessory after the Fact to Addelman’s multiple crimes including, but not limited to, Fraud, Conspiracy to Prosecute and Obstruction of Justice and
        4. evidences that Addelman’s intention is to provide a Statement of Defence laden with errors, omissions and malicious obfuscation in order to have Moore’s Statement of Claim dismissed with costs due to “baseless allegations” (see paragraph 18 of Appendix X).

__________________

[1] Interestingly, Nelligan Payne O’Brien LLP was the firm that recommended Moore retain nightmare-of-a-firm Victor Vallance Blais LLP to assist with her divorce in 2015. Why could they not represent Moore? They had represented Kiska in the past for an employment-related matter. Why did they not represent Kiska? They were the back-up firm for when Bell Baker LLP was going to be sued (details available upon request).

In 2015, Nelligan continued to look out for Kiska by sending Moore to Michéle Blais whose firm colluded with Kiska’s Bell Baker LLP accomplices who continue to commit crime with reckless abandon to this day.

(What. A. Racket.) Ottawa is nothing but organized crime, taxpayer-funded fraud, human trafficking, court-enabled torture and domestic terrorism.

[2] Note how Gomery awarded Blais $7,500 in costs though aware that the entire Motion was illegal! It was not brought promptly as prescribed in the CJA (see pages 2 and 5 of Appendix V); another violation of CCC’s S. 126 by the SCJ.

Endnotes

1 Dr. Paule Kemgni

2Filed/Served pdfs Original Statement of Claim | Amended Statement of Claim | Fresh A-A Statement of Claim           

PS. Shyster, Shyster, please come out; ’cause we have beyond a doubt. Too bad you were born so dim. Hugs & Kisses, your Goyim. Good Luck, Gonen!

    Deirdre Moore, Paradise, NL

May 24, 2023