Canadalawcourts.com - Canadian Lawyer Referral

_{canadian lawyers, canadian judicial council, supreme, appeal, superior, courts, court, bc, b.c., canadian lawyer referral, service, bc, b.c., canadian judicial council, legal aid, legal assistance, pro bono, Advice, advisor, counselor, attorney, counsel, advice, British Columbia, lawyer referral, referal, need, wanted, lawyers directory, law directory, lawyer, lawyers in Canada, law society, upper, canada, lawyers, legal advice, legal advisor, access lawyers, advocate, arrest, attorney, attorneys, bail, barristers, barrister, canada, canadian, law, charter, civil, civil rights, civil rights lawyers, civil lawyers, complaints, contract lawyers, contract, corporate, justice, justice canada, law, judicial system, legal system, legislation, statute, act, regulation, legislative process, amendment, canadiancanadian lawyers, canadian judicial council, supreme, appeal, superior, courts, court, bc, b.c., canadian lawyer referral, service, bc, b.c., canadian judicial council, legal aid, legal assistance, pro bono, Advice, advisor, counselor, attorney, counsel, advice, British Columbia, lawyer referral, referal, need, wanted, lawyers directory, law directory, lawyer, lawyers in Canada, canadalawcourts, law society, upper, canada, lawyers, legal advice, legal advisor, access lawyers, advocate, arrest, attorney, attorneys, bail, barristers, barrister, canada, canadian, law, charter, civil, civil rights, civil rights lawyers, civil lawyers, complaints, contract lawyers, contract, corporate, justice, justice canada, law, judicial system, legal system, legislation, statute, act, regulation, legislative process, amendment, canadian, canadian lawyers, canadian judicial council, supreme, appeal, superior, courts, court, bc, b.c., justice, canadian lawyer referral, service, bc, b.c., canadian judicial council, legal aid, legal assistance, pro bono, Advice, advisor, counselor, attorney, counsel, advice, British Columbia, lawyer referral, referal, need, wanted, lawyers directory, law directory, lawyer, lawyers in Canada, law society, upper, canada, lawyers, legal advice, legal advisor, access lawyers, advocate, arrest, attorney, attorneys, bail, barristers, barrister, canada, canadian, law, charter, civil, civil rights, civil rights lawyers, civil lawyers, complaints, contract lawyers, contract, corporate, justice, justice canada, law, judicial system, legal system, legislation, statute, act, regulation, legislative process, amendment, canadian, canadian lawyers, canadian judicial council, supreme, appeal, superior, courts, court, bc, b.c., Blair, richard, justice, canadian lawyer referral, service, bc, b.c., canadian judicial council, legal aid, legal assistance, pro bono, Advice, advisor, counselor, attorney, counsel, advice, British Columbia, lawyer referral, referal, need, wanted, lawyers directory, law directory, lawyer, lawyers in Canada, canadalawcourts, law society, upper, canada, lawyers, legal advice, legal advisor, access lawyers, advocate, arrest, attorney, attorneys, bail, barristers, barrister, canada, canadian, law, charter, civil, civil rights, civil rights lawyers, civil lawyers, complaints, contract lawyers, contract, corporate, justice, justice canada, law, judicial system, legal system, legislation, statute, act, regulation, legislative process, amendment, canadian}

Justice Blair said:

[29] ... Perhaps these reasons might lead Mr. Post.nikoff to reconsider the specialists' suggestion as to how he might best approach his problems. "Blair, J." BLAIR J.

The Reality:

Perhaps Judge Blair should use his own advice on how to approach his problems.

The reasons delivered by Justice Blair has prompted the Plaintiff to use Justice Blair's suggestion on approaching problems perhaps not in the way Justice Blair had banked on. The result is this Internet web site. In many upon many paragraphs Justice Blair seems to obsessively claim a need for psychiatric counseling for what he describes as problems, he even provides his own assessment, yet the reality is no evidence, scientific evidence nor measured evidence had been presented to support these allegations. Nothing Presented! Nothing Explained! What Problems? Maybe Justice Blair should use his own advice and seek some psychiatric assistance for the problems he has in making allegations that do not appear within the evidence.

No inferences can be made that the Plaintiff has any of the inferred problems described by Justice Blair, no measure, no verifiable evidence and no expert evidence was presented. These are totally unsupported allegations made by Justice Blair. The evidence was the Plaintiff did not have an informed consent to the operation, no risk had been disclosed that would have prevented the Plaintiff agreeing to the operation, no diagnostic procedures provided to see if the condition could be repaired and a wrongfully injected anesthetic. The legal council appearing for the doctors openly told Justice Blair they never disputed the fact of pain and swelling following the operation to save on lengthy submissions. The evidence fully supported these conclusions. Whatever other claims Justice Blair made is purely of his own making. Judge Blair's inferences intended to mislead. Appeal not permitted.

Like many of Justice Blair's other allegations including doctor evidence that failed to appear and Dr. White getting paid for the same attendance Justice Blair claimed to not happen, these are totally unsupported allegations. Fraud is claimed.

"Opinion evidence is not permissible when it is reality argument in the guise of opinion evidence. [Sengbusch v. Priest (1987), 14 B.C.L.R. (2nd) 26 (S.C.) at p. 40]; [Mazur v. Moody (1987), 14 B.C.L.R. (2nd) 240 (SC), at p. 243] Emil Anderson No. 1 supra, at p. 33]; [Emil Anderson No. 2, supra, at p. 363]; Vancouver Community College v. Phillips Barratt (1988), 26 B.C.L.R.. (2nd) 296 (S.C.), at p. 306]:

The opinion given must be within the stated qualifications of the expert or uniquely within the special skill of the witness. [Kelliher v. Smith, supra, at p. 684]; [Johnson v. Goldsmid et at, Unreported decision, December 21, 1987, Meredith J., Vancouver Registry No. C860754, at pp.4-5];

The expert opinion must be based on stated facts or hypothesis to be proven by evidence. The expert is not entitled to draw inferences or make findings of fact and then base his opinion on those findings. [Emil Anderson No.1, supra, at p.32]; [Emiil Anderson No. 2, supra, at pp.362-363]; [Johnson v. Goldsmid, supra, at p.4]; [Mazur v. Moody, supra, at p. 244]; [Bleta v. The Queen, (1964) S.C.R. 561, at pp. 564-567]; Quintette Coal Limited v. Bow Valley Resources Services Limited, supra, at pp.129-130]; [Hennessy v. Rothman (1988) 26 B.C.L.R. (2nd) 322 (S.C.). at p. 325]; Surrey Credit Union v. Willson (1980), 45 B.C.L.R. (2nd) 310, at p. 313].

Where a report contains admissible and inadmissible opinions, which are so inextricably bound up as to be practically inseparable, the report as a whole is inadmissible. There is no obligation on the adverse party to clear up ambiguities or indentify which inadmissible referances in an expert's report may be excised so as to render the opinion or any part of it admissible. [Emil Anderson No. 2, supra, at p.361]; [Emil Anderson No.2, at p. 32]; Quintette Coal Limited v. Bow Valley Resource Services Limited, supra, at pp. 128-129].

[ Beginning of Website ]	[ Introduction to Courts ]
[ Methods of Fraud ]	[ Tell-a-Friend ]
[ Executive Summary ]	[ Editorial Comment Board ]

	Justice Richard Blair must be removed from the Supreme Court.
	Justice Richard Blair is evidence that he can be a fraud and a judge.