~Z 0 4_

~~

re .-.f
"' ,

"0
r

~~~~~\ON FO/i"'~"''''

,....... ...
""

'"

-. 0
.

~'fy ~Yy

CLASS ACTION NOTICE

y

("h

. ~

~~

~~ ,

~: ,. ~~
~

::::t.

"Legal accountability

in the public interest"

~!! ~~I:{you filed a complaint against a member of the Law Society of Upper
Canada after the Amendment to the Law Society Act, 1998 received royal assent and came into full force and effect on January 1, 1999, you may have a cause of action and be entitled to receive compensation. If you filed an appeal with the office of the complaints resolution commissioner after the law society failed to investigate your complaint in any meaningful way and provide a fair process and a just outcome, you may have a cause of action and be entitled to receive compensation.
BACKGROUND IN:FORMATION

In 1990, the Law Society of Upper Canada took it upon itself to organize, incorporate and operate its own wholly-owned insurance company subsidiary, the Lawyer's Professional Indemnity Company (HLPIC"), to pursue the mandatory captive professional indemnity insurance market of its members. The incorporation of LPIC constituted a conflict of interest and conflicting fmancial interest on the part of the law society that breached the Society's role statement, that is to say, "The Law Socie!y' of Upper Canada exists to govern the legal profession in the public interest". By 1994, LPIC had accumulated a massive $200 million deficit.-

.~

: Law SocietyoAct
~

Revised Stalutos of Ontarlo, 1990:: , . ChaplerL.8 -.

-2-

BETRAYAL OF THE PUBLIC TRUST

To prevent further financial losses and overcome the massive $200 million deficit on the part of its 'insurance business', the Law Society of Upper Canada remained 'willfully blind' to public complaints and failed to discipline countless offences on the part of its members including, but' not limited to, negligence, professional misconduct, conduct unbecoming, fraud, sexual assault and solicitation to commit murder. The Attorney General for the Province of Ontario and the Treasurer of the Law Society of Upper Canada at the material time proactively contravened the Law Society Act; betrayed the public trust; and, knowingly recommended Convocation appoint a person as Complaints Resolution Commissioner when said person was in a conflict of interest and receiving a financial benefit as an executive member of the Lawyer's Professional Indemnity Company. The Attorney General for the Province of Ontario, the Treasurer of the Law Society of Upper Canada, the Lawyer's Professional Indemnity Company and the Complaint Resolution Commissioner owed a duty to the justice system and the people of Ontario which ensured a fair process and a just outcome. The members of the Board of LPIC rule out any suggestion that LPIC managed the liability insurance program independent of the Law Society of Upper Canada after 1995. The annual report LPIC released in 1999 confirmed the interests of the law society continued to be well represented on the LPIC Board by six Bencher Directors, and Directors from CDLPA, CBAO and the Advocates Society.

"Legal accountability

in the public interest"

-3-

AUTHORITIES The Amendment to the Law Society Act, 1998 created the office of the complaints resolution commissioner who will be appointed by Convocation. When a vacancy exists in the office of the complaints resolution . commissioner, a committee shall be established to be known as the Complaints Resolution Commissioner Selection Committee. Ontario Regulation 3111999, s. 1(1). The Complaints Resolution Commissioner Selection Committee shall be composed of the following: the Attorney General for the Province of Ontario (guardian of the public interest in all matters within the scope of the Act) or a person the Attorney General appoints as his or her representative on the Committee; the Treasurer of the Law Society of Upper Canada (the governing body that exists to govern the legal profession in the public interest) or a person the Treasurer appoints as his or her representative on the Committee; a lay bencher appointed by Convocation, who shall be the chair of the Committee. Ontario Regulation 3111999, s. 1(2).

"Legal accountability In the public interest"

-4-

The function of the Committee is to make recommendations to Convocation for the appointment of a person as Complaints Resolution Commissi oner.

Ontario Regulation 3111999, s. 1(4).

Convocation shall not appoint a person as Complaints Resolution . Commissioner unless the appointment is recommended by the Complaints Resolution Commissioner Selection Committee.

Ontario Regulation 31/1999, s. 2(1).

If you filed a complaint against a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada after 1998 and were compelled to file an appeal with the office of the complaints resolution commissioner after the law society failed to investigate your complai_nt in any meaningful way and deprived you of access to a fair process and a just outcome pursuant to the Law Society . Act; the CBA: Code of Professional Conduct; and, the principles of fundamental justice and the rule of law, you may have a cause of action and be entitled to receive compensation. Please forward particulars including: . the name of the lawyer the name of the law firm; when the complaint was filed; the nature of the complaint; the law society response; when the file was closed; when the matter was appealed; e the name of the Co.mplaint.;;Resolution Commissioner; and, the final decision.

NATIONAL COALITION FOR LAW SOCIETIES REFORM

4602 Victoria Ave.

All responses will be held in strict confidence.

Niagara Falls, Ontario L5E 487 Tel./Fax S05-374-2689 1-888-675-6564

NATIONAL COALITION FOR LAW SOCIETIES REFORM

4602 Victoria Ave. Niagara Fails, Ontario L5E 4B7 . Tel.lFax 905-374-2689 1-888-675-6564

Date: MOD, 14 Mar 2005 16:00:01 - 0600 From <ricknabi @ yaboo.ca> To: <:rndemarco@mailcaninetcom> markdemarco@hotmail.com Subject: Dirty Lawyer ~essage . TGsubject Dirty Lawyer Message

A fficna of mine (who ~Dtr died) bas is a eo asp irsc y trial with three de! CD

DO(even receive anl"mvltatlOD to atten ".pr! Cbermi$ Q.e., Chair g( the ~gs Authorization Committee dismissed the complaint during an "In camera" session and without any input frOm the complainant.

The Assistant Crown

assaulted in the courtroom b the ~tor. 00 tha: ts was decl ared a mis trial 10 I ts ore a jury. nsible was i.n.Structedb the AG's office NOT TO' CO-oPERATE with

!..Sue and as a result,

did

Rick

Richard A. Nabi
RICHARD A. NABI
&

TGrcd.i.ru( = JOK-Mes.s..age.bcmJ
name = Richard A. Nabi
ernail + ricknabi @yahoo.ca Forrns Burtoo I Send Message

ASSOCIATES

6JchwJ NlpL Prgjdsgl pr Ihe

fan Eric Bar'ASsocjiltjon preliminary Hearings some value
said hu vc

Barristers; Solicitors & Notaries 362 Mather Blvd., Fon Erie, ON, Canada
L2A 484
Tel: 905-871-4466 Fax: 9D5-871-4400

By TONY RlGIUTO Review staff writer

INTO THE CRIMINAL ASSAULT, MISCONDUCT AND COVE~UP BY croWN AnORNEY ANDREW BEll, CRIMINAL COUUS/ON BY NlAGARA croWN LAW OFFICE OFFICIALS, AND RlATED SEVEN OFF/CfRS OF THE NIAGARA REGIONAL POUCE DEPT. 'N1TH RESPCT TO THE UNPROVOKED CRIMINAL ASSAULT IN A CATHARINES COURT ROOM, "OF THREECONSfCUT1VE PUNCHES TO THE HEAD OF BUSINESSMAN MARK DEMARCO, BY CROWN ATTORNEY ANDREW BEU IN THE COURT, HE THEN

Sr.

FURTHERAmMPTED TO STEAL CRITICAL EVIDENCE AGAINST THE CROWN, POUCE AND GOVERNMENT FROM DEMARCO."
"legal accountability in the public interest"

NOTIGE
Law Society 'Act
RevIsed Statutes of Ontario, 1990:: . Chapter L.8 -.
l.J, W SOCl ETY

AJlonCj

oU\(nJ,

1 \I u;;ili..o 04 l14~blU
LALH'C.~ _.

om.yOMer,1
;Mv~tt

"
.

BUUdlnO

) ~y SlIH! 11 Pro" mt.O OH ~ :~1~

2)\1

: ~le.-~~le

NATlQ~AL_

In a decision that Y111lbe regUired rea~~/or each ofthe countn;:'s 15 aw societies and.tf1eir mem e~J Judge Rlordan chastised the 161-yeJr-olQIa\y

COALITION FOR LAW SOCIETIES REFO~ ..

4602 Victoria Ave . Niagara Falls. Ontario L5E 4B7 Tel.lFax 905-374-2689 .1-888-675-6564

~oclety

tr

THE

GLOBE

AND

MAIL

SATURDAY,

APRIL,201123

ben mcnally books &

THE GLOBE AND MAIL

AUTHORS

BRUNCH
at the King Edward Hotel, Sunday May I st, lOam.

.st

Mighty Judgment: How the Supreme Canada Runs Your Lif~

Court'/

by Phili~ Slay ton (Alien Lane Canada) Deep inside the Canadian Supreme Court, how it works, and why. reforms are needed.

The Toronto Sun. THURSOty. MARCH3,2011

ROBWIBERT1 Toronto Sun

.~

porrcerno.lc's
tigation,

~l~~OQC;-li 'id ~~~

against
the ~
were asked to but the L4:t(

du'e' to section itil A .vault closed around the lnves-:

Victims

"hAP~iAg.

give sratemenu. Society did not tell th~m what wa..s ThIs went on (or thr~ years. Ictims received confuslng advice" from various sources.i'One, for example,' was told by anothef lawyer not to go to police becausi i u 'ue it h der to et hi
UJoJ'l.u .

Ano!her UUSI accoUn! had $639.102.12 and was being monj!ored by the soejetv . llu ! investigators later fOWld!.here . were Iransfers jn and oul of tbe account that weren't approved by clients.The COWl noted more than $526,800 of that account came from the 2008 sale of a home belonging to an BI-year-old widow.

victiro.:s did 'con alton egloual . Police. Victims detectives told' them that tbe

.(For slx months, the law . society would not talk to

us. They would not return ..

Code o] Professional- Conduct 1 I. Disclosure of information necessary be 'ustified if the la er hll3 reasonable a crime is likely lO be commltte . to prevent a crime ounds for believin will that

o ur phone calls'
opp, Deteeuve Osvid ShanLZ ./ ,
.

.
for the Law its inv.esti

would have to wait

Society

to complete

.llke Slnclalr's.
,t,!I;O

Supreme Court Order

l.avyer s

LJll

Not Conceal

Crime

.the money owing.

LAW SOCIETY CONCEALS CRIME, CLAIMS IN PUBLIC INTEREST

t
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
CHANCE

OF SHOWERS. HIGH

23C

* TUESDAY, JULY 6, 2004

tlll'sl~l/".clllll

ONT:\.RI()

U.llll,;'

'[CJlIivetlent

to et bl'each

oftt'ustwith

resp...:.....:.....:...,;..:.....~.;..-.:.

""-.

Panel urges disbarment over sexual harassment

. "'NOTICE'OF

APPUCATION

~~~~~~~_v
J.

LAWYER GREENSPAN SAYS "AllegationsAGAINST his dient GARY NEINSTEIN DO NOT INVOLVE CRIMINAL CONDUCr. Lawyer GREENSPAN maintains the charges BY THE LAW SOCIETY, many reported to POLICE such as Unwanted sexual touchlnq", "Unwanted SEXUAL and suggestive gestures, advances", and Unwanted SEXUAL harassment" are NOT CRIMINAL CONDUCTS regarding those related allegations made against Gary NEINSTEIN.

'v

44.

Good word. What this _process is 'about, of ll,'ly {ossessing Mr. Daboll'$ -,
MR. THOMAS:
Ok&y.

bill of ~20,OOO or zero ..

MR. GOHEEN (ph): ~. THCMAS': Um hntm.

Kiss Principle,
"

it's. simple,

that

simple.

Now what he says, and let

me tell you

../.

about Mr. Neinstein,

paint
10

the $196,000 to $7,0~O. to

I'm not going to be Faulk~er but I'm going a picture ~or you b~cause we have a
Hr. I-

wondertul
Neinstein Fort

... (inaudible) . ..here.

was asking being the I:lient( the

who was from

Erie, to drive to Toronto

to Bay Str&et and 'then

with his sister taking the sister

15

driver,

across the road to the Park ~

hE.r for three the.n that? in hi!..
u \/'"

PllSza Hotel

lSnd banging

h~urS\i"

Can I be anymore clear

J
J

MR. GOHEEN(ph): I don't think so. MR. THCMAS:. And Mr. CUen.t would sit
office. And there
Is be sotill
.,
.1

were ch,uqes""fdt ..thos'ethree a lawyez:?'

:9:-'

hours
.... , 'MARK:
.~ I

MR. THCMAS:
MARK:

Yes, he is .

-j~
"

That's

my CJU;estionc.nswered ..
9kay~?

MR. TH<:w's:
lawyer

Now why 'is he still

.. , w~.nted to know.

IS

... (imudible)

He

"

J .said
- i

.--.:;:i.riBt:rRY;\BbSiness: though~ Mr,' Goheen (ph) ....."" ... -----""--""'~----""".~-""".

GOHiEN'fph).: Um ~.

~,~~-..-~... MiC'
MR, THOMAS: But it's
charged

th~t he was

hopeless alSohpl1C . That's

my buuiness
that

that

be ~ow what

;:>

the guy three hours.

Okay.

I'm going to do, and Ithinl

I will paint

12.

ibat get. me into Monte Hull and the three

doors. HR. GOHEEN(ph):

you

Okay . I've90t'a question tor

. . ~0MAs: Certainly. ~
'~. GOHEEN(pb): What if ie doesn't prove it? MR. THONAS: Well .. MR. GOHE!N(ph): What !f. HR. TH~: If he donn't prove his bill, 9f. course,' his bill is reduee4: An example, in this courtroom I.just f1ni$hed oft a 19 day
, I'

/\
\..

asses$ment.

And this 19 d~Y assessment, t-

reduced the aolicitor"s bi~l from $196,000

.7,000. ~: Could you soy that ~ga~n?~ ,

to

MR. THOMAS:

...

I reduced thi~ solicitor's

$7,000... ,Wow.

bill

Jfz9f $l~f' 000 to

MAIU<': WOW.
HR. GOHEEN(pb):

tt ..

MR. THc:tO.S:

Now that, that~lot

" of money:

./

..

~:

Could you reveal

to us the name of

th\5. .

attorney? ~. THOMAS: Certainly. He's nottrom this ,,----u:.!.p. I don't xnow whe~~ :..ou l_y.!,~~Cl.L the

.'

firm Neinstein/Glucstein? HARK: ,No.

HR.' THCHAS': Hmm.

/
.i

G.ary Neinstein,_

lWU<:

..
iil
,
./"

-r..._'-'!""
I'

. _.:...;:T~H~<MAS~ r~y~f:l~e.;,i.:.:.n:.st~~~i~n~.::Wa~:.s_t~h~e~l;.:;a:.:wy~e;=.r~: :~ . .:.,':..,:G;;:,:8;:,;:' _. ~ot:. record. There were approxi~Bt.ly 8ixflawye~

HR;.;'

"

-c.

"
I

,~'

297

Tiffney v. Neinstein & Associates Reasons for Decision - Thomas, A .0.

of Percodan. And then, along the way these ! experienced trial lawyers then began to either
5

- I don't know where the booze came from, but somebody had a bottle, and I think it came And here and it from Borden, Elliot liquor cabinet.

is this guy with Percodan and alcohol,

sounded to me like everybody was saying, "this is a good deal, sign up now". And that's what
10

I heard from Tom's wife and sister.

At.an integral part of eight year litigation, the client testified: "I was drunk". MR. NEINSTEIN,. who has referred to MR. TIFFNEY as an alcoholic,
15

J
a

were'anxious over with so I allowed

to get it (mediation)

him (TOM TIFFNEY.) to drink". at the mediation, between

In summary, there has occurred, serious and fundamental

20

misunderstanding

MR. TIFFNEY and the Solicitors. The imbalance a non-lawyer, personal between the position of a lawyer and they have a has The

in a contract

in which

and diametrically opposed interest, to go behind and inside a contract. of the usual approach with respect to agreements,

led to an impli~d authority for an assessment

25

officer officers

appropriateness

of assessment to fees, is as to just

made clearer where there is ambiguity what has been included ambiguity
30

for a stated fee. That

is obvious

in the terms of the retainer

before me on assessment,

- 3 That's my question answered. The subsequent itself. page 45 of the Transcript, appended, speaks for .

,
We will now demonstrate to you the methodology, applied by the' most senior Mismanagers of the Law Soci.ety of Upper Canada, .t.o put one of their high-profile favourites on career-life support, to artificially keep him breathing until retirement, in part, "not to bring the administration of justice into direpute". (As if any expendable capital were left 1) We ask all readers to follow bot~ the chronology of the facts as they unfold: and function

01 The enclosed Transcript notes, that the transcription refers to what was said on Friday, August 29, 2003. 02 On Page 12, conunencing at Line 13, Assessment Officer Thomas states, that the Assessment of Neinstein's bill took 19 ~days. I 03 On Page 14, Line 4, Thomas states, that they started assessment)' about three years ago. 04 That is app~oximately the summer of 2000. 62 (Tyler; TORONTO STAR) ... / (the

05 Neinstein, now cited as being would have been ca. 57 years old.

I I I I I I I I I I I

06 Pursuant to the Society's PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE regulations, Neinstein is served with a NOTICE OF APPLICATION, commencing a Heating before the HEARING' PANEL, to determine whetner he has contravened section 33(1) of the LAW SOCIETY ACT by engaging in professional misconduct. This NOTICE OF APPLICATION is undated, except for a rubberstamp, l.ndl.catl.nghat l.t was used as "Exhibit 1" during the t HEARING PANEL'S deliberations, on March 8, 2002, against a member, ~igned by George Hunter, Chair.
j-

TQ quote enclosed:
- ... '":

the

remaining text

of
! "='

said
...
. .

NOTICE

OF

APPLICATION,

The' particulars of the professional against you are set out below.

mi'sconduct alleged

1. In the period from 1988 to 19~3, inclusive, you sexually harassed in a professional context C.T. by engaging in a series of incidents involving unwelcome sexual advances and verbal or physi6al conduct Df a sexual'and non-sexual nature including but not limited toengagTngin unwanted

I I I I I I I

..- -:'7.~,-:- ..._-- .-.~---~-~.:.:-:;.\ ,:

;~~~:~,it:~~~i~:. :;.-~;r:':~:i::::;.:.7."/':',];:

r" .

28

29

Tiffney v. Neinstein & A~soc1ates Supplementary Reasons -Thomas, A.O.

Tiffney v. Neinstein & ASsociates Supplementary Reasons -Thomas, A.O.

Q. evidence
5

I think you made some comment earlier

CODE OF CONDUCT AND THE KREVER J, RULING ARE CLAER ~ ./

in your as to what I should do. I went to see.a criminal law er, Can you enlighten me
5

about the information that you got from.Mr. Tiffney I'm not sure whether you did or not. A. Well, I was, I didn't, you know, this is - I and we had had He had conducted lawyer, he was a
10

at, at first, and your reaction to it. on that? know,

I've had cases with Gary Neinstein but a professional relationship. appropriately. well known plaintiffs'
j

nothing himself
"

He was a plaintiffs'

I, I told.a Crown Attorney about discusse wo officers from the M

10

pretty enemies didn't

lawyer, d Ld a good job for We w~ren't

later l.tan Toronto .. help it.

plaintiffs. in ~he cases which I had with hi~. at all, we were friends. want to believi:/ it, and I

--- - There-1-'- ---- were aspects of story.

- -- H. w.as a remarkable -- -.-- I thought

I heard this story. to make

Police Department and, witryout telling them Mr. Tiffney's , name _+-_.c.:...::,-,-=--that,
15

- I didn'~ want to in~olve.him _ indeed, there wasthis

in'it if I could

it, firs~of

. ----. all, because it's

t!:
all up,

11 Thex took some steps with itespect to it. 'Later on, I learned
law suit of. the type described, that Ms. Renowden had sued, had sued for wrongful dis~issal and .some allegations, made to the Law Society, I believe. I don't know whether she had su-ed or made allegations about , sexual harassme'nt.-An ~
/' 2

remarkatHe .!.L.would ~ ~ ~ somebody ~ that th .tp~ ~ .u:. troubled ~

v'

It also troubled me, Mr. Barr, what I should do if anything.. The the for lawyers n eda little. so I'm hot ~ur are, but' there 'was, there was 'one that talked ebo communications, .and it says' th~t .those 'communications are to be kept confidential. respect client The commentaries, suggest to those, that Code of Conduct, that if 'a communication
25
--------------------------------~ __ ~__

tl:let -,/as, that -Ms

the end of that..

~.~
~as.

I,Lthen,

I knew from Mr. Tiffney Ithat there

vse-:

20

however, with

~nother person who had been present at some of thes~ meetings, and his name was Malcolm Thomas. Before I went to the authori'li;; I s-;t1sf1edm;;eif -;;e;tingwith liE....:.

bY

Mr. Tho~s'

~'

indepen~tly

of M~iffney/s( _
0f

vi

tells you about what, a commission And i~'also:ay: e

of a crime that may

verified some unusual as being made. say ing a ~' case. the--medi.at

facts and verified that the su was heard, overhea~r~ you take care

estioo' me,

take place, the disclosure of the confidential ustified. n describes a crime of violenceth

Mr. Neinstein

that if th~, the client w ich s,ere'of .that communication

I'll take care of you", which was what Tom understood ../' if you help me with Melanie, I'll.

to

_+

&...b r.m e_h""'a e_d, is mandatory. reasonable

help you with the

It also suggests that if you, t~e~lawyer - and So Ido' -t-know-how',,!-----._

this is a terrible position to pu~ a lawyer in - h'lis and probable grounds.

30 So, I don tt.ck now

"at"the"

end of

the

day to

the--f?'o.t.h
have

of

satisfy

that, but i

iscussed it with

------

30

all

of ~;'elt

I h"~

enough evidence

RULES OF CONDUCT AND KREVER J. RULING CLEAR

Code of Prolessionar Conduct

Disclosure of information necessary to prevent a crime will grounds for believin.8,that

U '.

ffi ..J w

..

by order of a court

-_. -- ---":.- ... NEWS 5

.

.. ffi :::J
..J -

"Victims,n~t~LSUC~lold COpS
ROB UII8ER11 Toronto Sun

. en
en {
wI .....J

en
w .....J

:L

SUI pouce

wer~n

notl-

-.
en w ::J . en
UJ

now be en laid In the case, which allegedly Involves S12 million. police said. . "Reports and complatnrs are confidential until a notice of applk::ation is issued," societ)' spokesman Usa Hall said. "Our mandate is to gov\em the legal profession; she said. "Complaints and invesigatlons are confidential," Nevertheless. the society and police were eventually in contact with each other during the investigation. which culminated in the current charges. A Superior Court judge in 2008 and 2009 dealt with the disbursement of cash recov-

ered from Mauucco in this case by the society .. Court heard ili~ socie<y was appointed uuste6ofMuzuceo's law firm' on March. 26. 2008 because "of aU~tions tE'iftie had engaged mon. frauds.-~ety investigators found money in three bank accounts and a browri envelope in his Mississauga office. Justice D.M. Brown heard the Royal Bank of Canada froze three accounts "as a result of concerns about fraudulent activity," Of the three accounts, .~.here was a "r o g ue trust

account," which had not been disclosed to the Law Society. containing $75,454.43. The society said the account was opened in May 2007 "without the knowledge of the LSUC in order 10 transact mortgage advances outside normal law office procedures." Court heard "the LSUC's investigation showed that Mr. Mazzucco received instructions for these mortgages. including the disbursement of funds. from unknown persons u. The mortgage transactions Sl3I1ed in November 2007 and ultimately involved the receipt fr orn financial

institutions of ,bout 24 mortgage advances. NI the transactions later were disroyered to be fictitioUS. .. -It appears that some of the mongagors were fictitious. the names of some mortgagors resulted from Identity thefts; OOUl1stated. "In a few cases. the banks questioned Mr. Mazzucco about the transactions. and he repaid the advanced funds by using monies received on other transactions. "Berwe e n Nov.6. 2007. and March 14.2008; a total ofS8.169.801.28 was deposited into the .RBC Rogue

Trust Account. Of that amount, financial institutions advanced $4.838,001.74: court docwnents stated. The unmarked envelope contained $43.140. Another trust had $639,102.12 and _s being monitored by the 5OCidy.lHu investigators later round there were transfers in and out of the account that weren't approved by clients.1he COUl1 noted more than $526.800 of that account came from the 2008 sale of a home belonging to an 81-year-old widow.

account

rob.lamberti@sunmedia.ca

WHAT THE LAWSOCIETY SAID

Particulars of alleged professional misconduct from Notice 0\ Application. filed March 26, 2010:
Between Nov. L 2007. and March 30. 2008. Mariano Mazzucco misappropriated and/or misapplied $6.893.625.50. more o. less. from trust funds he held on behalf of his lender clients by failing to use the funds for the purposes for which the lender clients advanced the funds and instead by: a. Disbursing funds approximately b. Disbursing tunes approximately c. Disbursing funds approximately d. Disbursing funds appr oximately

lawyer was
'trusted' because of his parents
BRAMPTON - Some who invested t hei, life savings will1 a Missis~;1uga lawyer now lilcing ruuu i-rniuionoolta. fraud cll;\'ges lIu~te<J IIi,,, IJCCd\l;-'\' 111c'Y kllcw hi.. IId,lI' :,"0 d;rd I ';H.h ill It:,,\, 1'"1,, .
,:.;lId

~, ..

.....J -..

en

UJ

.....J - $3~07l\284.30 $1,036,&92.10 $440,697.10

10 othe'

Sl~655,270.50
to repay lender cueois who. afte, ildvilncinp, r110rlr,ilge funds towilrr1s Iriln~:1ctior1s lhilt did not ,Io:-c.(i) discovered tllill 11,,
t
I :1I1~.;;c11()1l:'~ di<111()t

parlicip;Jlll~, ill Ihe l'iltlrltll('llt 5<:11('nu'

10 hunsclt.

to Ihi,d p.lrlie~ lor nis OWIlIH:'H'fil. 0' 10 Illi, d (lilrtir':, (~.CJl1lf' wl'ol11wc'r!' Ilf
c-li('flt~,) In whnll) 11" nw('d
"'OI\f'V

10 third parties

(whose relalionsi1i[llo tl1(' fraudulent scheme anrf /or t hrRr'<;pon<1cllt ,:. ,"lkllOWIl 1(1 111,.PI1II(':1111) ilo ",,'11' 1101 " w
1'1111111'11 11. 11 It'
I1II

ul-.

close

much." but he said he had no reason to doubt the honesty of tile lawyer who dined at his II0rl1(' and whose aunt wor ked ,,' Ilis p.xp;lIlding business. IJ,y r "I:li<.11i:, not ,0 I,.<>"d .
ln- ':.r:I(1. tt.,1t;1I\

()I

.lrldllll: :.pr:;1kin)'.

(,i) :,:J.-:d l l n- f;c~:'l'nrl(1r'''''rr

\I""':'~"lIl1'llI

wllI1111:~ It')',_,1i,dV]',('j

wl111 pf{,(\11h~1

OFFICERS OF THE COURTS ARE NOT TO ASSOCIATE WITI-I -ANY PERSONS OF BAD CHARACTER LACKINGIN GOOD ETHICS, INTEGRITY OR MORAL CONDUCTS IN EITI-IER PERSONAL OR PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY
THE GLOBEAND
MAIL

------

FRIDAY, MARCH 25,2011

PMO

PM reportedly' felt betrayed by adviser ,.,' ..

STEVE RENNIE OTTAWA
, t ~.,

(
I

\ ..,
\

The Canadian Press

SENIOR GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS USE CONVICTED CRIMINAlS AS STAFF ADVISORS, BlIT THE PUBLIC ARE THE CITIZENS LACKING CREDABllllY BEFORE CONVICTED LAWYERS COLLEAGUES OUR JUDGES ..

NEWS
"

Canada's cult of secrecy

Harder than ever to get information from the federal government

, It's tlIlclear whether it,would allow societY. investigators' to' call in p'olice when, frauds like C../ ~s~detailed ill a Toronto Sliiiita .-. r .:5 Ulv~~tfon were Wlcovere[ It cwi e w . t::. klSO ~ Dot ,0TI] torontcsun.corn s~ty'sConcern that, if it Eassu ....c - es l onnation on, Holice won't have the.resources to taKe op :=J Cl.. -.S~ mjlljoo .. OQ h these will te-collar crime cases. . ~o f~lcg, Di (hey c~11 (he. Cl) against I.o.ll'. .onservative Leader JoTo .., ,-ponce ,wioo 49,12. Me' E rJ" who's .vAul( closed (he a I (igauon. Yictirru were asl::c:.d ~ -t-J give .Ha(emcQu, but We L4:,!: y'ears, said Bryant must toughen er: SocleC)' did not lell them what hAPfZll~g. Tiils went on (or WC<. his proposal so it 'ireq~es" the o yeul, Icums received conruaio -+-' s dvlcc' from sources,.'Oo<;, socie~ to pass information j . (or ex a.nothcr I er no( to to U~ s ,p'olice. I2~ also said Ontario it has~e of1libest white-col .. larcrime investigators in its po .. gf lice departments, but ''we j_us_t--f-"';'-~~~~~~. C/3 don't have enouglJ of them," 'aud is fraud and theft is no ,ma,tter w ,0 is a~jng It,lJ ~ ~ )~b;-!~iorys~lld In an interview. "

0,

(('s

the

kJ

around

invc s .
10

'

WoU

VUiOUl
WoU (j

ake

dcr 10

cl

,~ ,?,. " ri\-~the

b

-------

Systemic discrimination"

BARRISfER& SOUCITOR
416 OAXYW, ON L6H 5R2 www.lNl1u.ea

NOimsDvlaROADBAST; S&ni 300' ... - "'

,.,

'l'SWfiOm: '9()5:849-4800 PACSlMIl.B: 905-338-6413

pll'lCWilll~ler .ca

.FAX TRANSMlSSION TO< '. FAX NUMBER: Clayt~o Ruby FIRM:' Ruby & Bdwardh '
MCWILLlAMS, PETER KIMBER a,c.
1

41~9648305

DATE: PAGES:

~rU4'20~~

TIME: ' mOM: .' OURFlLENO:"

Dear Mr. Ruby:
,

3:~~
. Peter K.MoWUllariu, Q.C.

I ~iDcluding this page)

I v. Niagara Regional PoUco etal, "

LLB Osgoode 1953, BSc. Harvard 1949, UTS 1943 Peacefully in his sleep in his 85th yr, May 31st, after visiting Niagaraon-the-Lake, Predeceased by his beloved Frances Ivy McWilliams (nee Albertson). brother David McWilliams, a,c., sister-in-law Beverly and parents Lorna McWilliams, a,c. and David McWilliams, P,Eng. Dearly missed by his children, Susan, Darcy and Brian, his cherished grandchildren Andrew, Shay and Marlow, and his cousin Bain lreland, At 16 yrs entered Harvard. Followed legal profession of his mother, brother and grandfather and practiced law in Milton and Oakville for 58 vrs, Crown Attorney for Halton County 1958-1968; Halton Conservative Candidate under Robert Stanfield in 1968 facing Trudreaumania,,.A.. , r e He held a deep be ie 'n fi tin in'u tice and took on includin actions wron olng, a ainst olice

.'
,I

'5010.2

RE:
..:.
;

"

'

" .. ,
:.

ODeo(f1JY~om 11 ~t cUen III Ontario Provincfal Po MoCaullffe Do ~u by aiiychAnco bavo a copy offt? If.o, r am,wondering findinghs tq that? . , ,' .
. t

.'
,

a CBC

wbetpor Mr. Justice Colter made any

'.

roblems with Crown.c~'.

for one MazicDc" ,I'

..~ .

\A.<1!. '~i_A'
. . <: .. .,\:

.~(f(I'()~"
.

/'

An esteemed legal scholar wrote/ edited for 30yrs McWilliams on Canadian Criminal Evidence, published The Rambling Tales of A Country Lawyer, Bencher LSUC 1978-83, Pr es. Halton County Law Assoc. 1968-69 Recent years faithfully atterided his UTS luncheons and Harvard reunions. Known for his sartorial elegance and trenchant wit, Peter was Halton's own Rumpole of the Bailey, He will be remembered for his profound love of the law, history and his family, Memorial Service followed by reception at Maplegrove United Church, 346 Maplegrove Drive, Oakville, Thurs. Jun 9th, Bpm.

Peter K. McWz.Wams, PM:;'k . '._.

'.

Q.c.

The anm~oZl ~ 10thlJ~mWloD ~colllllkDtW iD IlIlUrc and oaly 1o~ded (or tbo~bovc1lIlDed iDdIviduaJ or cnOl)'.. I!YQU!an f~yed thlJD.cnor, plcu. ull (90S)"'9-4'00. i

TO SUBSCRIBE CALL 1-866-36 GLOBE

THE GLOBE AND MAIL ~

A22

TORONTO STAR

WEDNESDAY,

NOVEMBER 24, 2010

EDITORIALS

l"ORONTO STAR
John D. CruickshankPublisher Michael Cooke Editor

Ian Urquhart Editorial Page Editor

Peter Bishop \lP and CFO .lA Sandy Muir VP Advertising Briun R Daly VP Human Resources
EST.\BLISlll~D 1892-JOSEPII

Edward A. MacLeod VP Consumer Marketing Pam Laycocklnterim VP Digital Media Edward Greenspon VP Business Development
E. ATKINSON. PUBLISHER, 1899-1948

SMIRKING LAWYER

Bentley has to act

Justice dj.stractedis justice denied. That's the message from Justice NolaGarton as she discharged the jury in a murder trial after the bizarre behaviour by a Crown Rrosecutor seated in the public gallery in her courtroom The distracting body"langt!age and intimidating glares of assistant Crown Paul Alexander prompted an unprecedented written appeal from the jury that he be ejected from the gallery. The defendant also accused Alexander of distracting her durillg testimony. The judge may decide Thursday to declare a mistrial, unless she and the Crown agree to a defence request to hear the case without a jury. Regardless, it now falls to the province's chief law officer - Attorney General Chris Bentley to pick UR where she left off - by dealing decisively with the alleged misconduct of a Crown la~er. To date, Bentley has mere y muse pu 'Clyabout ow surprised he was by this development, while Pilllting the issue to his officials for investigation. But Bentley hasn't gone far enough in reassuring the public that he will act expeditiously on this case. . When a CrownlaFYer wreaks havoc with a costly murder trial- in this case, a retrial of the same case he prosecuted a year ago, and which ended in a first mistrial - ~ public has every ri~t to deman~ accountability. Not just from prosecutors, but from Bentley himself. -

EXCERPT FRO'" NIAQARA FALLS REVIEW'

/1
I

.Judge rules client can sue

Falls lawyers
An Ontario Supreme ri~ter'~ nbligation to the ., Court Judge has awarded court is higher Ihan the 10 cosu against two Nitgata client and t,hat he therefore " Falls lawyers in a hearing should be free: frum' ~inll 10 determine whether they influenced by the danger can be sued by a client ofa suit by his client. who claimed poor courtMr .. Just Krever said room performance. there is no evidence that ~ Mr Justice Honce the risk of such innuence Krever ruled that Gul!" is so serious that clients Ungaro and his partner .should be left without reGcorge Barycky. as weW course. u other civil lawyers iJ!... In a 43page judgment OnlUio. do nOI have the handed down Friday, he immunirx enjoyed by bar said clients must have rislers in England and can protection againsl lawyer be sued by their clienu. negligence. pll1icularly al He was ruling in a suil a lime when the profession filed by Mm De M 0 of arc is growing at the rate or SI. Cath.uines. who sued 1.000 lawyers I year. aJ~r I court ordered him Pointing to a growing to pay .s6.CXX> and costs to number of malpractice a woman who claimed he suits against doctors in owed her the money. Ontario, he said il was not Mr. DeMarco alleged in Ihe public interesl 10 the lawyers did not coungive lawyers an immunity s.el him adequately. that . P.2ssess.ed by no other Ungaro did nOl appear at professional group. _ the trial and inst.ead sent Chief Justice Bora Barycky, who DeMarco Laskin of.he Supreme t ~d was unprepared, and Coun ofCanada $lid in a that Barycky failed to lead lecture in 1969. when he supportive evidence he was on the Ontario Court (new was available. of Appeal. that the House .;. Philip Epst.ein. counsel of Lords decision on bar for the ewo lawyers in the tisters immunity ~ )Ont.arjo Supreme Cow! "ba.sed on considerations sought a ruling on which lave no Can:ldian wne r Baryclty's COUIt relevance." room performance could "The rules conduct " of be the subject or a sui!. that in England govern the . MI. Justice Krcver dis retarions between barru~ Ef?$tein's ; ters and solicitors have no ~ ~ Uw OnlUio should meaning in Canada. give the wne immunity Gwyers here &.re generenjoyed by British barally both barristersand ris~rs. solicitors and eenainly Epstein cited a House of belong 10 the same soc Lords ruling in the laIc ~. I%Os that stated a bar.
EXCERPT FRO lA THE GLOBE"

J.4A'L

Bungling Iawyers

liable to lawsuits
)

h7'

Sungling lawyers are not protec ted from the result of their incom itence in a coua the Ontario. . upreme Court as ru ed. ' Mr. Justice Horace Krev~r ruled that Ontario lawyers do nOI have the same immunity granted to British barristers and may be sued by their clients for an inept couruoom perfonnance. Krever's decision Friday stem med from a suit brought against two Niagara Falls lawyers whorepresented a St. Catharines man. Mark DeMarco. Lawyers Guy Ungaro and George Barycky represented DeMarco in a $6,000 lawsuit. DeMarco lost and decided to sue his lawyers for ineptly handling his defence. KIever's 43-page decision pointed out that while it may be the rule in Britain it has never been made law in Ontario. Krever's decision noted that../ lawyers have no more protection or immunity th'ai1'dOctors or other '-professionals.

/
. .

....
".;"

=:..
.

.. ;

".

"--" .'.:" .~,-.: '.'

:'~ ::~. ..~

-'. p .

..

: ':
r-

;:'., ..
".

;.

. i"

." ~ . ..

:.....
,"'.
,"

. .. Mlnlstere des ServIces gouvernementau,c et des ServIces aux conscrnmateurs

.BtJreau'du dlrecteur

. ~

I'~'"

.:

,-

. ". MlnfStiy of Government and' Consumer Servl~es .. '

t?Ontario

Consl.lller Prot~On Bra ch 5IT5 Yonge Street. Suite 00' Toronto ON M7A 2~5 Tel.: 416 326-8811 Toll-free: 1 800 88~9768 Fax: 416 326-8665

DIrection de la protection du consommateur

SITS. rue Yonge. bureau 1500

Toronto ON .M7A 2E5 1 . T6I.: 416 326-8611 Sans frals : 1 800 88~9768 . T6I6c. : 416 326-8665 .

Mr. Mark. OeMarco 46'02 Victoria Avenue . Niagara Falls, ON L2E 487 Dear Mr! OeMarco: '. , ,

..

',,'

.....

Thank you for your f~x'dated May 8, 2008 In which you outline your concerns regarding the way in'which your compl~int with the Law Society of Upper Canada w.as handled. The Consumer Protection Branch at.the Ministry of. Governme,ht ahd C~l)sumer . Services administers consumer protection legislation and medl~tes and In~estlgates complaints fro . nsum egardlng businesses. However, we do not review . complalnt : . out or against re lato-ry agencies: I would suggest that direct Y.Qur Y.QU com'Rlal .agalnst -the Law Socle of Upp.er Canada to the Ministry of Attorney General which erseeS this agenc at tha !Iowin address: >< .
I'

t.

I,"

The Honourable ,Chrts Bentle MinistrY of Attorney General ,.' 20 Bay Street, .11th Floor ' oronto ON M5G 2K7
....

.
"I.

"

Thank you 'rtaking . Yours truly,

the time

rite this . to me regarding ..... matter.

. I'"

Chap. L.8

.~p~
Christopher A. FergusO O'irector . ,
Auomey

General, guardian of the public interest

"