That, in turn, has led to
abuses by litigants dragging out proceedings for strategic purposes.
Not exact matches
[18] To the extent the doctrine of champerty and maintenance remains relevant in Canadian common law, even as means of protecting the courts and vulnerable
litigants against
abuses, its purpose is not and was never intended to be achieved
by conferring on the courts the discretion to inquire into and approve or disapprove of a plaintiff's funding arrangements as a condition precedent to instituting or pursuing litigation.
Posted Tuesday, October 18th, 2016
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Jurisdiction, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific 9 Comments»
One of the purposes of these Reasons is, through this
litigant, to uncover, expose, collate, and publish the tactics employed
by the OPCA community, as a part of a process to eradicate the growing
abuse that these
litigants direct towards the justice and legal system we otherwise enjoy in Alberta and across Canada.
The knowledge that self - represented
litigants are — almost
by definition — under - funded can often prod opposing lawyers to engage in litigation practices that would otherwise be considered as vexatious or as an
abuse of the court's processes if conducted against a fellow Member of the Bar.
Posted Monday, August 3rd, 2015
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific
Posted Thursday, March 21st, 2013
by Gregory Forman Filed under Child Custody, Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Family Court Procedure, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys 1 Comment»
Posted Wednesday, September 3rd, 2014
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific 1 Comment»
Posted Friday, March 26th, 2010
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific 1 Comment»
Posted Sunday, March 3rd, 2013
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific 23 Comments»
Posted Sunday, December 6th, 2015
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Appellate Decisions, South Carolina Specific 8 Comments»
Posted Friday, November 13th, 2009
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Guardians Ad Litem, Mediation / Alternative Dispute Resolution, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Specific No Comments»
Posted Thursday, September 22nd, 2011
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Not South Carolina Specific, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, Of Interest to General Public, South Carolina Appellate Decisions 3 Comments»
Posted Sunday, July 18th, 2010
by Gregory Forman Filed under Department of Social Services / Child
Abuse and Neglect, Guardians Ad Litem, Litigation Strategy, Of Interest to Family Court
Litigants, Of Interest to Family Law Attorneys, South Carolina Specific 1 Comment»
Litigants (sic) pointed to a presumed gender bias in the courts, unethical practices
by lawyers, procedural flaws, credence given to false allegations of
abuse, parental alienation without consequences, and inadequate enforcement of orders and agreements.
Whether the matter at hand is a basement suite rental, a builders lien, or an insurance breach — a
litigant may
abuse perfectly good laws
by taking advantage of the system which administers their dispute.
Not only do they
abuse litigants by unfairly jailing them but they financially uses too and that is ROBBERY.
The broader statements
by Professor Meier and other commentators (e.g., about rates of domestic violence in custody litigation, rates at which those alleged to have committed
abuse win custody, and who poses greater risks to children) refer — at most — to
litigants for custody — at most 20 % of divorcing fathers.