In my efforts to better understand court procedures, as determined by the Judge presiding, I have had several responses to my request to better comprehend what occurs during the actual how, and WHAT, while in attendance. None sufficiently explain my request.
Since I have been afforded but ONE judge (under the circumstances) I am seeking to better prepare myself to what I will encounter on SEPTEMBER 10TH, @ 2PM, in OTTAWA.
I envision the following:
COURT SCENARIO:
(All rise as the the Judge enters the court room; all sit after the judge has been seated)
I might hear:
“ I have perused Mr. Steen’s Appeal. And, although as a Self-Representing Litigant I have some sympathy for him having taken the incentive and troubles to have driven to Ottawa all the way from British Columbia, my jurisdictional confinement and the several additional technical anomalies of the file, do not allow me, at this time, to hear the details of the case. I will prepare my report with its pertinent details … in due time. Dismissed…Thank you “ (Judge gets up; all rise; Judge leaves Court room
The Appellant is dumb-founded and is guided out of the Court room.
If any reader is knowledgeable about the procedure:
1) Will the judge allow for opening statements?
2) Are there Jurisdictional confinements to which a Divisional Court Judge is restrained?
3) Is it this judge's prerogative to deal with the specifics?
4) If not, the actual issues of the case are NOT heard; the HEART OF THE MATTER is a non issue?
5) Case law rules, and you are toast Mr. Steen. NO new case is sufficiently different.
6) Have a pleasant ride back to your never-never land in BC.
Any pertinent response will be much appreciated.
Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Post a Comment