84. FOR THE RECORD

VIEWS @ 6818

NOTE:

The email below I just sent out to 5 email contacts at the Ottawa Court House. When I filed my appeal, I was informed by the secretary of the Divisional Court I was NOT to make email contact. I could leave a telephone message, use Canada Post mail, or FAX. 

I just spent over an hour trying to use my iMac's FAX, but to no avail. I can't figure it out. Something to do with the inside Modem, rather than the Ethernet  Modem Telus provided me. I have chosen to ask one of the 5 connects to please forward the following text.

FOR THE RECORD

(as additionally posted on my blog)

To whom @ the Divisional Court of Ottawa this may concern:

Background to request/order 2 transcripts:

Case #10-49776 was ordered in to Case Management on January 17, 2012. After some 6 Defense Motion driven case conferences over the following 20 months, on September 20, 2013, Master Calum Macleod, acting on behalf of the Ottawa Superior Court presided at a 'Special Appointment Defense Motion Hearing.' The focus was the Plaintiff's alleged refusal to comply with earlier Endorsement Orders. 

On Dec 06, 2012, during a 3 hour Defense Motion's scrutinizing perusal of the Plaintiff's answers to Defense Undertakings, stating he was familiar with the claim - it "not being an example of excellence in drafting" - Master Roger concluded the Plaintiff was "on notice to comply;" "all questions ordered answered have been found relevant and outstanding." "The above is a fair and reasonable disposition in the circumstances of this case." "Considering generally the concept of proportionality...." 

Responding to the Plaintiff's continued request to explain how the, to him, claim irrelevant questions were considered 'Relevant', Master Macleod responded: "The court is not there to explain itself. I'm not going to over-turn his (the Master's) order."  On September 23, 2013, Master Macleod dismissed the claim, posting it as Case law #10-49776 on Canlii.org.  

Present:

On October 21, 2013, this former Plaintiff filed an Appeal. He ordered transcripts of the above 2 sessions. Both are now in possession of the Appellant; the second being filed as a 'Certificate/ Notification of completion' by its transcriber on January 24, 2014."  

The appellant understands the rules stipulate a 60 Day filing deadline date for the completion of his Appeal's Certificate of Completion, from the Date of the official January 24, 2014, filing of the second Transcript.

The Appellant calculates that date to be: March 25, 2014.

NOTE: 

Although most all Ottawa Court offices allow for official email connective exchanges, the Ottawa Divisional Court has forbidden this Canadian Citizen this most efficient online privilege. 

After much effort, the appellant has been unable to FAX the above to Ms. Salkeley. Rather than risking leaving a telephone message, the appellant herewith chooses to send this email notice, notifying additional Court departments of the above information and understandings. 

The appellant would much appreciate hearing from any court services, concurring his above calculations are correct. Conversely, the forwarding of same to Ms. Salkeley would be much appreciated.

Thank you so very much,

Jan Steen

(Self-Representing)