A Vancouver woman is asking for the courts to make an example of her neighbour, a practising lawyer she alleges has filed a baseless pseudolegal lawsuit against her in an attempt to “provoke a state of fear.”
A Vancouver woman is asking for the courts to make an example of her neighbour, a practising lawyer she alleges has filed a baseless pseudolegal lawsuit against her in an attempt to “provoke a state of fear.”
Supreme Court master on Wednesday, asking for a notice of claim filed by real estate lawyer Naomi Arbabi to be struck as “scandalous, frivolous or vexatious.”
Arbabi’s notice of claim, filed on Oct. 5, accuses McLelland of “trespass” for installing a privacy divider on her rooftop deck in their Fairview condo building.
McLelland argued the lawsuit is a clear example of what Canadian courts have termed an organized pseudolegal commercial argument (OPCA) — a thoroughly debunked and wholly unsuccessful class of legal theory favoured by fringe groups like Sovereign Citizens and Freemen on the Land.
She went on to say that “a trespass occurs when a man or a woman knowingly does the wrong deed … not by accident, not by ignorance, but with intention and without authority and does not provide remedy or lawful excuse.”
She told the court there was no deck divider when she purchased her condo, and its installation has ruined her home’s “crown jewel” — its view of the North Shore mountains.
The original article contains 1,224 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Lol what is wrong with people? Have we come so far that individuals have so much free time to build nonsense in their mind. ( her name is a dead entity corporation created by a birth certificate LooooL)
“That i possess a licence to practice law in the legal jurisdiction of the province of British Columbia does not make i into a lawyer, the same way that having a driver’s licence to drive a motor vehicle does not make i into a driver,” Arbabi said.
Uhhh, whut.
My question is how did this person ever become a lawyer???
Any unhinged literate person can, you just have to get a few technical questions right; then you can go on to exercise the opposite of what you answered to get that grade
I think that’s an awkward (and sovcit) way of saying that even though she is a lawyer, she isn’t acting as a lawyer in this instance
Imagine having to deal with this crap. How does the “lawsuit” make it far enough for the defendant to be served? Or is that something that happens without any actual review by the courts?
Honest question: with this level of complete insanity in a legal filing, what are the chances that a deranged sov cit who has somehow passed the bar, is disbarred? Surely a point blank refusal to acknowledge the authority of the legal system is grounds?
I mean, if the law doesn’t apply to anyone who says the magic words in the right order, then this person shouldn’t be too upset they’re being removed from representing that legal system, right?
“Many courts, including the claimant, have trouble understanding what is often referred to as natural law. … Natural law — or as i call it, just law — is that which is so obvious that it is not required to be written down into an act or statute," Arbabi said
So what the dead corporation woman calls law is the antithesis of law.
LOL at the reporter posting the insane letter she received from the woman threatening to sue if her story was told without her consent. The crazy arabi must be fuming the reporter saw that and was like, “Yup I’m gonna post this because this is bullshit.”
“As such harm is a very grievous trespass, i, shall claim remedy in the amount of $500,000 for such trespass plus $5,000 a day for as long as the trespass continues,”
Could/should the journalist just uno reverso Ababi and claim trespass damages of $1M + $10K a day?
“That i possess a licence to practice law in the legal jurisdiction of the province of British Columbia does not make i into a lawyer, the same way that having a driver’s licence to drive a motor vehicle does not make i into a driver,” Arbabi said.
100% this woman is a sovcit. That whole driving/travelling thing is their go to, their God damn addiction. She couldn’t help throwing it in there.
I’m surprised (though in hindsight only a little surprised, humans being humans) to see a Sovereign Citizen with a law degree and an actual license. Sovcit thinking patterns seem literally deranged to me, so it must take some serious compartmentalization to have passed the bar.
Or perhaps she went insane afterward, for some reason.
Lawyers do need to comport themselves properly, and can’t engage in things that may tarnish the respect for the legal system now that they’re members of the bar.
Fucking hokum qualifies as an example of the kind of fraudulent whackadoo shit that needs to attract a disbarment hearing.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
Arbabi is about to find out that the dildo of consequences seldom arrives lubed.
The legal system is sick to the back teeth with the sovcit idiots.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A Vancouver woman is asking for the courts to make an example of her neighbour, a practising lawyer she alleges has filed a baseless pseudolegal lawsuit against her in an attempt to “provoke a state of fear.”
Supreme Court master on Wednesday, asking for a notice of claim filed by real estate lawyer Naomi Arbabi to be struck as “scandalous, frivolous or vexatious.”
Arbabi’s notice of claim, filed on Oct. 5, accuses McLelland of “trespass” for installing a privacy divider on her rooftop deck in their Fairview condo building.
McLelland argued the lawsuit is a clear example of what Canadian courts have termed an organized pseudolegal commercial argument (OPCA) — a thoroughly debunked and wholly unsuccessful class of legal theory favoured by fringe groups like Sovereign Citizens and Freemen on the Land.
She went on to say that “a trespass occurs when a man or a woman knowingly does the wrong deed … not by accident, not by ignorance, but with intention and without authority and does not provide remedy or lawful excuse.”
She told the court there was no deck divider when she purchased her condo, and its installation has ruined her home’s “crown jewel” — its view of the North Shore mountains.
The original article contains 1,224 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Lol what is wrong with people? Have we come so far that individuals have so much free time to build nonsense in their mind. ( her name is a dead entity corporation created by a birth certificate LooooL)
Honestly feels like she might be losing her mind. Pretty sad.
What the fuck. She needs to be disbarred.
Uhhh, whut.
My question is how did this person ever become a lawyer???
Any unhinged literate person can, you just have to get a few technical questions right; then you can go on to exercise the opposite of what you answered to get that grade
I think that’s an awkward (and sovcit) way of saying that even though she is a lawyer, she isn’t acting as a lawyer in this instance
Imagine having to deal with this crap. How does the “lawsuit” make it far enough for the defendant to be served? Or is that something that happens without any actual review by the courts?
Yeah I can read between the lines but don’t see any point to it all. I don’t even know how the courts processed any of it given the language alone.
Lovely the legal system can afford to appeal to nut jobs 🫠
Honest question: with this level of complete insanity in a legal filing, what are the chances that a deranged sov cit who has somehow passed the bar, is disbarred? Surely a point blank refusal to acknowledge the authority of the legal system is grounds?
I mean, if the law doesn’t apply to anyone who says the magic words in the right order, then this person shouldn’t be too upset they’re being removed from representing that legal system, right?
“Many courts, including the claimant, have trouble understanding what is often referred to as natural law. … Natural law — or as i call it, just law — is that which is so obvious that it is not required to be written down into an act or statute," Arbabi said
So what the dead corporation woman calls law is the antithesis of law.
Her bio on her firm website makes it a point to state that
which has big “My ‘I’m in good standing with the Law Society’ shirt has lots of people asking questions that are answered by my shirt” energy.
LOL at the reporter posting the insane letter she received from the woman threatening to sue if her story was told without her consent. The crazy arabi must be fuming the reporter saw that and was like, “Yup I’m gonna post this because this is bullshit.”
Could/should the journalist just uno reverso Ababi and claim trespass damages of $1M + $10K a day?
That’s the lawyer being accused in the OP. Note that the lowercase i is not a typo.
Can’t use uppercase or the government gets to steal your soul and keep it in a jar.
“That i possess a licence to practice law in the legal jurisdiction of the province of British Columbia does not make i into a lawyer, the same way that having a driver’s licence to drive a motor vehicle does not make i into a driver,” Arbabi said.
100% this woman is a sovcit. That whole driving/travelling thing is their go to, their God damn addiction. She couldn’t help throwing it in there.
I’m surprised (though in hindsight only a little surprised, humans being humans) to see a Sovereign Citizen with a law degree and an actual license. Sovcit thinking patterns seem literally deranged to me, so it must take some serious compartmentalization to have passed the bar.
Or perhaps she went insane afterward, for some reason.
It is shockingly easy to pass the bar. Like, Sydney Powell is a lawyer for Christ’s sake.
Lawyers do need to comport themselves properly, and can’t engage in things that may tarnish the respect for the legal system now that they’re members of the bar.
Fucking hokum qualifies as an example of the kind of fraudulent whackadoo shit that needs to attract a disbarment hearing.