Tales from a lawfirm

[Nark_Sinseeker]

Hi all,

I work as a lawyer here in Canada at a firm that specializes in residential tenancy law.

I'm a new call, so I've only been at it a year or so. I've got a bunch of wacky cases that make for fun stories with friends and family.

Thought I'd share some here when things are slow at the office. Let me know what you think!

*for confidentiality reasons, I remove or change sensitive details. All quotes are paraphrases, so don't take anything too literally.

** I cannot offer any legal advice, and none of this is intended to be proffered that way. But feel free to ask your law-related questions and I (or others) will try to see how the law may treat someone in your position!

[Nark_Sinseeker]

An expensive text:

Here's the story of a single message that cost a landlord over $8,000.

So I get a call from a landlord (LL) - he's panicking cause he's being sued by a couple after he refused to rent to them. He says they're trying to sue him for $30,000 on human rights grounds, alleging he discriminated against them because they are a gay couple. LL's swearing up and down he's not a homophobe and he didn't refuse them because they were gay etc. He's frantic but I manage to calm him down and we talk about what happened.

He tells me he put a rent ad up on social media and got contacted by a prospective tenant (PT). PT says they are a family looking to rent, their last landlord was selling the house so they had to find a new place to rent. Their conversation went well until LL asked PT to send over some documents (usual proof of identity, proof of employment, pay stubs, past landlord references, all that). Once LL gets those docs, LL starts to vet them. Huge red flags start popping up:

- letter for proof of employment looks like it was made in notepad (no business logo, no contact number, generic name@gmail instead of @business etc.)
- pay stubs are just as bad. like someone googled 'payment receipt' and just typed it up in 5 mins. nothing formal about it.
- LL looks up the business address, its an apartment complex, no business building to be found. Even pays for an incorporation search, but nothing comes up. Can't find the business on google or linkedin, completely invisible.
- PT said it was a family applying, but didnt mention they were a lesbian couple. So LL gets identity docs of two women with two children, all of which have different last names (adopted kids? prior relationships? who knows)

So LL thinks "wait a minute, this isn't a family, these are just roommates! and they forged a bunch of these docs! Their last landlord must have had troubles and is probably evicting them... not worth the trouble."

At this point, LL should have just said that to PT. Or messaged them something like "thanks for sending the docs. unfortunately I am not able to rent to you at this time." The law is you can refuse to rent for no reason, but you cannot refuse to rent for a BAD reason. Tragically, LL decided to message them a bad reason.

LL says something like "oh, i did not realize you are not a family, sorry I only want to rent to a family." (You see, in LL's mind, roommates can split up any time and that can cause problems with collecting rent. A family is less likely to break apart and cause the same kind of problems. So LL wanted to avoid that potential headache.) Human rights law around here says you cannot refuse to rent based on family status. So LL did a no-no right away. But that no-no got turned into an 'oh shit' because the couple took it to mean something else:

PT messages back in a fury: "WHAT? you don't think A LESBIAN COUPLE IS A FAMILY? that is CRUEL and HIGHLY ILLEGAL. I will be suing you at the human rights tribunal! Everything was okay until you saw we were gay! ---"

LL doesn't even have time to respond. PT gets their friends in on it. LL is bombarded on social media by an army of LGBTQ+ allies. Turns into a huge deal. LL does the smart thing and stopped replying fearing it would only make matters worse (rightly so).

Couple days later, LL gets a nasty legal letter in the mail. "From the law office of Lawyer. LGBTQ+ individuals face discrimination every day! You are perpetuating a system of prejudice! Human rights! Pay us $30,000 AND take a course on discrimination selected by us AND pay our legal fees AND explicitly state how inclusive you are in your rental ads! or we'll SUE for even more!"

So after he tells me all this we schedule to connect later in the week and I go check out some recent human rights tribunal cases on discrimination to see how screwed LL is. This was my first human rights matter so I wasn't sure. I find 3-4 cases where the tribunal awarded SUBSTANTIAL damages to the discriminated. Judgement ranged from $15,000 - $45,000 depending on how bad the facts were.

Relatively speaking, his situation wasn't so bad. Some of the caselaw involved landlords locking the tenants out of the unit once they discovered they were gay; one particularly bad one had physically assaulted the tenants. LL's problem was just a misunderstanding and refusal to rent based on family status, nothing to do with PT being lesbians. Bad, but not so bad.

So I explain to him what the likely outcome is based on that research, suggest we engage in negotiation with the other side, and try to settle this matter cheap cause if it goes to a tribunal he could be on the hook for way more. He agrees and ultimately we settle things. The settlement + legal fees ended putting him out of pocket a little over $8k.

So far the most expensive text I've seen.

[Tunabros]

My uncle is a lawyer

he once told me he did drugs in college to stay up and study

[Gatordash]

What a moron.

Also it appears lawyers are WAY CHEAPER in Canada than the US. haha

[unsunghero]

Interesting story!

Yeah if you are a member of a protected class and are denied something for any reason, it almost seems worthwhile to sue if you are able

My Uncle is a residential home appraiser (has been for like 20+ years), and he’s a democrat because his daughter is a far-left democrat, and my uncle was more moderate until she converted him. Regardless, he did an appraisal for a particular home value for a black family that was accurate but like $200,000 less than what they were wanting

So they submitted a formal complaint to whoever oversees these appraisers saying that he under-appraised the home value because they were black. Now his job is on the line and he is getting a lot of grief from the company he works for because they just want stuff like this to go away as quietly as possible. The black family has zero proof or evidence that the home was appraised for far below its value, in fact the appraised value matched other homes in the area

None of that shit seems to matter. Also, there’s nothing my Uncle can do assuming he wins his case. Apparently to counter-sue for slander there would need to be demonstrable proof that the claim being made was false. So if they claimed that my Uncle gave them an unfair appraisal because he is not an actual appraiser, he could prove that claim as false by verifying his certification. But there is no easy way to prove that a claim of racism is false, to essentially prove that one is not a racist

So he either he loses his entire livelihood and this family gets awarded more than an extra $200,000 (plus any settlement) for being black, or else nothing happens. So basically if you are a protected class and are denied something, there is almost no reason to not submit a complaint of discrimination. Only good outcomes can come of it

[Boptop]

What a moron.

Also it appears lawyers are WAY CHEAPER in Canada than the US. haha

Yeah Canadian courts don't award the inflated damages that the US courts generally grant.

[Jibartik]

the TL:DR of op's last case

Canada is a dystopia and if you just say the wrong words you could end up in court.

[Nark_Sinseeker]

Interesting story!
Yeah if you are a member of a protected class and are denied something for any reason, it almost seems worthwhile to sue if you are able

... there is almost no reason to not submit a complaint of discrimination. Only good outcomes can come of it

This is a very unfortunate but true statement. My cousin joked that he (single and straight) should band up with a friend, claim to be a gay couple and apply for rentals broadly across the province until a landlord slips up then sue and collect settlement payouts.

[alphys]

Lol Canadian law.

[Nark_Sinseeker]

Homeless homeowner:

Here's the story of a landlord who, because of the pandemic and emergency legislation, went homeless for over 16 months while her lowlife tenant stayed in her home rent free:

TLDR: landlord wanted to move in to her own home and lawfully evict the tenant. Tenant delays and doesn't pay rent for 16 months. landlord gets the home but not the rent.


I dubbed her 'suitcase lady' (SL) because she literally lived out of a suitcase; couch surfing with friends and family until an order was issued. This is the saddest tale of how the law favors tenants in my province.

Bit of background on the law: Tenants here have what is called 'Security of Tenure'. That means they cannot be evicted except for a limited number of grounds. Unless the tenant commits a wrong (fails to pay rent, damages property, does illegal activity, etc) the landlord only has two options to lawfully evict. One option is if the landlord or family member requires the property to live in for at least 12 months.

I get a call one afternoon from a very soft-spoken, kind hearted woman. I could tell right away she was tired - like she was getting ready to tell the same story for the hundredth time. Her tone was a mix of wanting advice, but also needing someone to talk to. I was happy to listen.

She explained that she had just gone through a nasty divorce, and as part of the settlement had to sell her matrimonial home and split the proceeds with her now ex-husband. She owned a property in the city that she wanted to move in to, but her Tenant (T) refused to leave.

She was very independent. She had called the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB), the body who adjudicates these disputes, and they told her the steps she had to take to successfully evict T. As instructed, she gave the proper notice, filed the proper eviction forms, and impatiently waited for her hearing to be scheduled. Everything the law asks her to do in order to lawfully evict the tenant. She hoped it would go smoothly. She was wrong.

As soon as she gave notice to T, they stopped paying rent. T claimed that when the notice document was given, it terminated the tenancy, so he didn't have to pay rent despite continuing to live in the unit (??? what). SL calmly explained to T that he still had to pay rent but once the time period expired (60 days from when the notice is given), he would have to leave. T refused, and wanted to fight it in front of the tribunal. SL was taken aback, and called us for help.

Sidenote: This all happened in the midst of the pandemic. My province had just enacted an eviction moratorium (ban on enforcement of evictions). That ended up being a catalyst for disaster. Tenants decided this meant that if they couldn't get evicted, they didn't have to pay rent! (That was a busy couple of months at my firm, but more on that in another story) Too bad the banks weren't as forgiving. Imagine thousands of tenants failing to pay rent and hundreds of landlords still on the hook for their mortgages. Businesses shut down during the lockdowns, meaning streams of income were cut off... It was a mess. Anyways back to suitcase lady.

So I have to painfully explain to her that because of the pandemic, there's about a 4-6 month delay from the time of filing an application to when it actually gets scheduled. Then there's the delay at the hearings themselves, the time from judgement to when an order is issued, and then the delays in enforcement of the eviction order from the Sheriff. All in all, it could take upwards of 8 months (I thought I was being generous in the delay. turns out I severely underestimated how bad things were).

Months go by and not a word from the LTB about her hearing. I file a request to shorten the hearing, claiming the landlord is HOMELESS and this is an urgent matter. They agree and it gets scheduled a few weeks later. SL is annoyed at the delay but happy to have something firm. She has been homeless about 4 months at this point.

Then the day before the hearing, T says his wife has to go to hospital and needs to be there, so will miss the hearing. He asks it gets pushed back. Unfortunately due to something called the Principles of Natural Justice, T gets his wish and the hearing is pushed forward a few weeks. Note T is not paying rent this whole time, and SL is beyond humiliated for having to ask friends and family to sleep on their couch a little while longer. She's been storing all her stuff in a storage facility costing a few hundred each month too. All the while T is kicking back, warm and cozy, rent free, no worries in the world.

Get to the new hearing, and T requests that it be in french language. Since many provinces in Canada are bilingual, the tribunal has to oblige, and we get an english-french translator. That makes the hearing take FOREVER. Every sentence, the party needs to pause, let the translator say their thing, then continue.

Add to that the fact T is a sophisticated slimeball. He knows if he delays long enough the hearing will need part 2. He starts rambling on some nonsense at the speed of molasses - and it's obvious to everyone what he's doing. In the end, T gets his wish. It takes so long that they have to adjourn the matter to be re-heard at an unknown time in the future. We bring a motion to shorten again, but don't hear anything back. The new hearing ends up being scheduled another 3 months in the future.

Next hearing, and we come ready. We know T is going to delay as much as he can, give some BS sob story cause he has no argument in law, and so we actually give the adjudicator permission to ask all questions herself and hear all responses in french (despite our client only speaking english). Then there's no need for translation and we can speed through.

It works. The adjudicator gets visibly angry at T because every time she tries to ask a question, T blabbers about irrelevant nonsense. She ends up cutting him off enough times to keep him on track and finally she snaps mid-sentence and says "MISTER T, since the start of this you have not given me any reason why I should not grant this eviction. You have not paid rent in 13 months and claim it is because the tenancy is terminated. But since the last hearing it has been explained to you that this is wrong and illegal. If you do not give me a reason, I will have to end this hearing and issue my judgement."

Meanwhile SL and I are smirking behind our masks cause we were hoping the adjudicator's patience would run out. T had nothing to say, and literally just begged the adjudicator for some more time to find a new place to live. Absolute slimeball. I speak up and point out he has had more than a year to find somewhere, and despite SL sending him rental advertisements of places in the area with similar rent, he still hasn't chosen one. More time won't do anything.

And you know what T says to that? What this scumbag says? He says "Well, maybe if SL would assist me by giving me, I dont know, like $300 a month to help me find a new place, maybe I can ---" the adjudicator cuts him off again. No one can believe what just came out of his mouth. You've accrued over $10,000 in rent arrears, left this poor lady homeless and paying storage fees + mortgage, and now you want HER to subsidize YOUR rent?? Are you insane? "Hearing over, expect the judgement soon."

Unfortunately, "soon" doesn't mean anything. We waited over 6 weeks for the order to come out. All the while T still not paying rent. We file with the Sheriff to enforce the eviction, but the enforcement branch is delayed an average 8 weeks. All in all, T doesn't get out of the unit for over 16 months.

Part of the judgment was that he pay the arrears, but he's on disability support, which is government funding and immune from garnishment. So SL is pretty much out the rent + other costs permanently. She's grateful for my firm's help but extremely bitter about the process. She's since gone on to advocate in every avenue she can find to try and change these laws.

The legislation here is really skewed against landlords. You can't even charge interest on rent arrears, so if the tenant waits until the day before the sheriff knocks at the door to pay in full, there's no penalty and they can continue to live there. So why even pay?

[starkind]

It's best to not reply to anyone or socialize ever and just use pseudonyms to talk to yourself.

[Blingy]

Nark

Sounds like you'd do well in Seattle. We have similar things going on. Our tenants union is an angry mob of landlord hating scum.

[Jibartik]

An interesting aspect to life people dont tell you about.

If you are a total loser, when another total loser asks you to join their totally batshit insane idea you have nothing to lose so you say ok and often those pay out big and now you're a real winner (because in dystopia the only way to win is to get lots of money quickly)

But if you went to college and have a shitty job you hate, you're not going to take that risk.

So the best advice I can give you is, squat in someone's home like OP here mentioned in that 2nd case and then wait for a drug addict friend of yours to ask if you want to help him open a pot dispensary.

[unsunghero]

Man, I dunno how these landlords just put up with that shit

I wouldn’t do anything violent to that tenant, but I definitely would try to get creative about how to make his life in my home a living hell if he tried to pull that with me…

[Nark_Sinseeker]

Our tenants union is an angry mob of landlord hating scum.

There's an organization in my province who coordinate hearing-raids. since all tribunal matters are public, anyone with the zoom link can join. I've had a couple (ill tell one in the next story) of my hearings bombarded by discord trolls cause the adjudicators are old and useless with moderating 'new fancy software'.

An interesting aspect to life people dont tell you about.

So the best advice I can give you is, squat in someone's home like OP here mentioned in that 2nd case

Landlords here have it real bad. If they're your tenants and they stop paying rent, then you change the locks on them, guess who gets charged?

Man, I dunno how these landlords just put up with that shit

I wouldn’t do anything violent to that tenant, but I definitely would try to get creative about how to make his life in my home a living hell if he tried to pull that with me…

quick story: Landlord calls, old-school dude, must be in his 70s or 80s. He had a tenant who he hated and who hated him. Tenant would pour cement down the drain and stopped paying rent until the landlord fixed it. LL's pissed cause its on the same septic as his own home, wants to know what he can do. I explained that its the landlord's responsibility to unclog the drain (must keep the property in a state of habitability - plumbing is mandatory) and then chase the tenant for the cost. Then LL can file for eviction but expect a few months' delay cause of the pandemic. LL said "fuck that, I know a guy who will just break his arms" and hung up.

[unsunghero]

quick story: Landlord calls, old-school dude, must be in his 70s or 80s. He had a tenant who he hated and who hated him. Tenant would pour cement down the drain and stopped paying rent until the landlord fixed it. LL's pissed cause its on the same septic as his own home, wants to know what he can do. I explained that its the landlord's responsibility to unclog the drain (must keep the property in a state of habitability - plumbing is mandatory) and then chase the tenant for the cost. Then LL can file for eviction but expect a few months' delay cause of the pandemic. LL said "fuck that, I know a guy who will just break his arms" and hung up.

Lol wonder what happened

Ya the downside is anything you would be doing to try to mess up your evil tenant’s day, would be things you’d be doing to your own property and be responsible for fixing as a landlord

Hmmm I know you are required to give advanced notice as a landlord before being allowed to enter their residence. But I’d be doing that juuust as often as legally allowed up to every other day or something. Maybe I could occasionally show up and flip all the circuits on the breaker to off, then padlock the thing shut with a heavy duty lock. That’d mean no AC, all the stuff in the fridge going to go bad, etc. Then play dumb and take my sweet time getting over to investigate it. Would have to be creative on how to cause problems without causing direct damage

[alphys]

this just in; landlords are parasitic scum. They can fuck themselves.

[Nark_Sinseeker]

this just in; landlords are parasitic scum. They can fuck themselves.

Interesting take. Would you rather individuals relinquish their right to privately owned real property, have the government hold title to all land/homes and regulate housing instead?

If not, how do you suggest an individual or family secure living accommodations when they don't have the up-front capital to buy/mortgage/build a home?

[Nexii]

Ironic because most landlords don't want to rent to families in Canada, noise from kids and such. And yea discrimination happens all the time one way or the other about this, but you'd be dumb to put it in writing...

[Trexller]

this just in; landlords are parasitic scum. They can fuck themselves.

hey folks i found a guy who can't keep up his end of lease agreements

[Jibartik]

this just in; landlords are parasitic scum. They can fuck themselves.

land should not be for profit!

[Blingy]

land should not be for profit!

You're right, it should be free and open so everybody can live like this.

https://www.realchangenews.org/sites/default/files/styles/article_image_full/public/Homeless%20camp%20sweep%20by%20Matthew%20S.%20Brow ning.jpg?itok=1zUoVgZx

[Jibartik]

I think if we're going to live in a prison of our own constructs, sitting at red lights at midnight with nobody in sight for miles and sending money to the IRS.

We may as well add one that says rich people cant have more than 2 houses.

[Ooloo]

this just in; landlords are parasitic scum. They can fuck themselves.

Many landlords, if not most, are simply providing housing to people. It is often a primary source of income, and if they have a tenant go delinquent it can seriously affect their ability to provide for their own family. Do you care about that at all? Or do you just hate "the rich" (who are often not really that rich).

You are not entitled to another person's property. If your landlord is shitty, that's one thing. But more often than not, it's shitty tenants fucking up the property and exploiting the system.

Many landlords provide low income earners the opportunity to not just live on the street. Show a little gratitude.

EDIT: This always bares repeating: Hating the rich is not the same thing as caring about the poor. More than likely you are mad at your lot in life and are desperate to blame somebody else; IE landlords.

[Jibartik]

Who cares replace all of that with computer system.

[alphys]

Its really just that simple. No explanation needed. Same default group as money lenders with ursury.

pc run government would be only safe and stable system because of inherent human flaws.

BUT WHO PROGRAMMED THE PC BROOOOOOO

Anywya, we are heading towards Ayn Rand " Anthem "

PS Landlords are total scum and personal property over 100k should be abolished.

[Ooloo]

PS Landlords are total scum and personal property over 100k should be abolished.

That is absurd, who are you, hitler? Please tell me how to live mein furrrror!!

Who are you to decree how much money somebody wants or needs? What if they have 10 kids to support? What if they live modestly but employ and pay 200 people healthily? You're just jealous of rich people.

[Ooloo]

"Tax the rich" is just punitive jealousy. The rich already contribute about 70% of all tax revenue. When you increase tax rates on the rich, they just find legal untaxable avenues to invest in and pay fewer total taxes. When you tax them at lower rates, they are more likely to just pay those taxes, and you collect more net tax revenue because they pay an enormous percentage of all taxes.

This is really basic economics.

[alphys]

Abolish private property over 100k in value. If you want to continue extending your reaches you can then instead funnel the excess towards community projects and personal / familial clout so in a few generations it will just be second nature to invest in humanity instead of whatever people are intending to really do with their excess money.... pass it on? seems a little... NEPOTISTIC

[Whale biologist]

"Tax the rich" is just punitive jealousy. The rich already contribute about 70% of all tax revenue. When you increase tax rates on the rich, they just find legal untaxable avenues to invest in and pay fewer total taxes. When you tax them at lower rates, they are more likely to just pay those taxes, and you collect more net tax revenue because they pay an enormous percentage of all taxes.

This is really basic economics.

no its not, braggart.

[Ooloo]

Abolish private property over 100k in value. If you want to continue extending your reaches you can then instead funnel the excess towards community projects and personal / familial clout so in a few generations it will just be second nature to invest in humanity instead of whatever people are intending to really do with their excess money.... pass it on? seems a little... NEPOTISTIC

That is insane. I'm assuming you're trolling, like whale biologist, and you don't actually believe what you're saying.

I can respect that. Good game.

[imperiouskitten]

"Tax the rich" is just punitive jealousy. The rich already contribute about 70% of all tax revenue. When you increase tax rates on the rich, they just find legal untaxable avenues to invest in and pay fewer total taxes. When you tax them at lower rates, they are more likely to just pay those taxes, and you collect more net tax revenue because they pay an enormous percentage of all taxes.

This is really basic economics.

not really at all. if a highly evolved, highly stratified civilization has .1% of the population personally owning and controlling most of the machinery of the earth, the argument clearly falls apart. We are arriving in time at that civilization. It is clearly not an argument from the personal but one from practicality, much as you might like to make it all about ego wars by framing it in a childish way.

Yes, the rich will have to pay an "unfairly high" share of taxes in a highly stratified future, if your conception of the world is like goo goo ga ga. Epic win. On the other hand, they have to do this because what they own is so insanely valuable that no human being ever should have been declared to "own" so much in the first place, so I wouldn't cry too much for the cruelty of it. "Just desserts" for the vast majority would be a sentence too ugly to write here, so I hardly think it is a wise rhetorical move to bring in fairness.

Luckily, I am pretty sure this post is just bait :) nobody perceives their civic duty in such a low, self-serving manner as to see everyone around them in the same pathological way no? Some odd norms in play. :)

[starkind]

More real lawyerquest. Lol. (https://www.pcgamer.com/amp/activision-blizzard-lawsuits-in-chaos-as-federal-agency-accuses-californias-dfeh-of-ethics-violations/)

Serious post.

[Gatordash]

More real lawyerquest. Lol. (https://www.pcgamer.com/amp/activision-blizzard-lawsuits-in-chaos-as-federal-agency-accuses-californias-dfeh-of-ethics-violations/)

Serious post.

That story has way too many acronyms for my brain to handle while at work at 11p on a Monday.

[starkind]

That story has way too many acronyms for my brain to handle while at work at 11p on a Monday.

Basically lawyers doing lawyer stuff they aren't supposed to do and getting found out. And the irony it vindicates the defendant even tho there was shenanigans for sure.

People get greedy. And stupid. Probably just a huge waste of money, time, private and government resources which would have been better spent on a news documentary, if such a thing can even still exist.

Prosecution should just quit lawyering and gone to VICE and signed for the book rights. The outcome would have been better all around and they would probably have been legally in the right. Instead of cringeworthy disbarment territory.

Generalized enough?

[Bardp1999]

Canadian lawyer has the same schooling as American fast food cook. kekeke

[Gatordash]

Basically lawyers doing lawyer stuff they aren't supposed to do and getting found out. And the irony it vindicates the defendant even tho there was shenanigans for sure.

People get greedy. And stupid. Probably just a huge waste of money, time, private and government resources which would have been better spent on a news documentary, if such a thing can even still exist.

Prosecution should just quit lawyering and gone to VICE and signed for the book rights. The outcome would have been better all around and they would probably have been legally in the right. Instead of cringeworthy disbarment territory.

Generalized enough?
Thats pretty messed up. Didn't a woman commit suicide in large part due to the things that went on here? Kinda reminds me of the federal judge audit WSJ did where judges were ruling in favor of the companies they own stock in. Link (https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/574244-131-federal-judges-failed-to-recuse-themselves-from-cases-in-which)

[starkind]

Thats pretty messed up. Didn't a woman commit suicide in large part due to the things that went on here? Kinda reminds me of the federal judge audit WSJ did where judges were ruling in favor of the companies they own stock in. Link (https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/574244-131-federal-judges-failed-to-recuse-themselves-from-cases-in-which)

The suicide was like adultery n stuff. It was like a serious affair. It becoming public later with pic sharing may have contributed tho initially it wasn't like sexual harassment.

Tbqh I out of a sick morbid curiosity researched that some. No one rly talked about it. I don't think it's the reason for the suite at all. Just a footnote at "look at this gross behavior".

As an adendum. I was in a class that was all women and something similar happened minus the suicide afaik, some girl threw a party and ran around naked showing off her "real" Vijay and her classmates all shared the photo around (no I wasn't kewl with it). Needless to say I really hope she didn't kill herself cuz of that. The blizzard lady.

Anyway.. I imagine she went steady or serious did a lot of extramarital kinky. Broke up. Blizzard boyfriend shared revenge pics afterwards. She was ashamed, ruined her marriage, couldn't walk it back. Denied things. Offed herself because of her lack of social support and relentlessly toxic relationship with toxic people in a toxic industry that destroys introverts. Sad really. Outside the perview of the lawsuit and criminality probably. Just more evidence it was a shitty place to work where women were pressured into uncomfortable relationships and sex, however consensual their relationship was purported to be.

No different than basically any company or privileged powerful male in authority I ever had the pleasure of working for tho.

Thx for sharing your link. And spurring my thoughts and ruminations on our fucked up culture lol.

[Nark_Sinseeker]

Canadian lawyer has the same schooling as American fast food cook. kekeke

I studied two years at a US law school and two years at a canadian law school. I have law degrees in both countries now. Canada was more difficult.

US was focused on memorization and understanding material - exams were 'closed book' for the most part and the professors practiced the Socratic 'cold call' method:
"Mr. Sinseeker, stand up. tell us the facts of the case, what was the rule, and what was the holding?"
Everyone did their readings/homework for fear of getting cold called and not knowing the answer in front of your peers. You were graded on participation (upwards of 20% of your grade) People were competitive but more to show-off than anything.

Canada was more focused on accessing information and applying material - exams were almost exclusive 'open book' and posed hypothetical scenarios to apply the rules to. There was less accountability (no cold calling) so almost no one participated in the lectures. no hand raising, no reading of facts. Lots of lecturing and not much conversation. I found it very boring. Maybe thats why I thought it was more difficult. The exams were pretty hard.

Canadian students are cutthroat. The year before I started, students had gone around tearing key pages out of the law books in the library so other students couldn't study properly. That kind of stuff. I preferred studying in the US though I wouldn't want to live/practice there.

[Whale biologist]

I studied two years at a US law school and two years at a canadian law school. I have law degrees in both countries now. Canada was more difficult.

US was focused on memorization and understanding material - exams were 'closed book' for the most part and the professors practiced the Socratic 'cold call' method:
"Mr. Sinseeker, stand up. tell us the facts of the case, what was the rule, and what was the holding?"
Everyone did their readings/homework for fear of getting cold called and not knowing the answer in front of your peers. You were graded on participation (upwards of 20% of your grade) People were competitive but more to show-off than anything.

Canada was more focused on accessing information and applying material - exams were almost exclusive 'open book' and posed hypothetical scenarios to apply the rules to. There was less accountability (no cold calling) so almost no one participated in the lectures. no hand raising, no reading of facts. Lots of lecturing and not much conversation. I found it very boring. Maybe thats why I thought it was more difficult. The exams were pretty hard.

Canadian students are cutthroat. The year before I started, students had gone around tearing key pages out of the law books in the library so other students couldn't study properly. That kind of stuff. I preferred studying in the US though I wouldn't want to live/practice there.

Do you they make you speak French? Canada is some weird mutt legally.

Is it a mix of English law and European civil law? Barbarians. :(