Jan. 13. 2010, SELF REPRESENT; A Defiant Moncton City Lawyer George LeBlanc then and now remains accused of Fraud Upon the Court subsequentially as we see here; in denial George H. LeBlanc drafts a series of what appear as ‘damage control’ A

Please download to get full document.

View again

All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
 35
 
  http://justicedonedirtcheap.blogspot.ca/ CLICK HERE. January 13. 2010 Affidavit of George H. LeBlanc with Exhibits necessitated the: March 16, 2010, Retraction Affidavit of lawyer George H. LeBlanc, of the City of Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada, which also necessitated the Retraction of Affidavit by George H. LeBlanc's Process Server Dave Daneliuk, who until this point had claimed, that he - Dave Daneliuk had the documents in his possession for service upon Andre Murray, since October 5, 2009, further that he - Dave Daneliuk had been attempting service and claiming that Andre Murray avoided service on Oct 5, 6 & morning of 7th day; please notice Paragraph 20 is absolutely false, para. 8 of this Affidavit forwarded the Motion for service on October 6th, 2009, records show that the Acadian Bus Lines transported the documents which reasonable were not available for pickup until late in morning of October 7, 2009.The facts are chronologically organized; Please click here: http://tinyurl.com/scribd-justicedonedirtcheap Fraud upon the Court is realized and confirmed when Andre Murray commissions a Official Transcript which Andre Murray gives to George H. LeBlanc who attempts to obfuscate the matter, further, by not admitting that the Transcript came from Andre Murray who paid for it.Instead, and as the situation plays it self out appears to Andre Murray as he perceives George H. LeBlanc 'caught in a corner', the evidence is undeniable the George H. LeBlanc initiated this revealing topic of Validation by Substituted Service before presiding judge Mr. Justice Zoel R. Dionne for documents which had not yet been filed nor did they yet exist as a Court Filed document, not in any relevant or legal way before October 15, 2009; three days is the discrepancy between the date George H. LeBlanc claimed the subject documents were served upon Andre Murray. Three day difference which amongst other discrepancies in the many perjured Affidavits filed by George H. LeBlanc and associates persuaded Mr Justice Zoel R. Dionne to Grant the Orders of eviction of Andre Murray from his legal status residency of his leasehold duplex in Fredericton N.B. It does not end with this as Mr. Justice asks George H. LeBlanc three times to confirm that the subject Documents (which did not yet exist) had indeed been served on October 13, 2009 On each count George H. LeBlanc responded yes. Much to much to explain here although the picture becomes clear as the chronology is revealed. Watch for Process Server Dave Daneliuk Retraction Affidavit, which only admits to half of his own fraudulent Affidavit of Service. which his own employer Lawyer George H. LeBlanc inadvertently exposes.   Court file MC-0642-09: IN THE COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH OF NEW BRUNSWICK, TRIAL DIVISION, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF Moncton. Court File Number: MC/0642/09, BETWEEN: Plaintiffs ROYAL BANK OF CANADA, 501376 N.B. Ltd. a body corporate, and Defendant, ANDRE MURRAY.   http://justicedonedirtcheap.blogspot.ca/   The Lawsuit is over alledged conversion of property, and became litigation based on interpretation of the Residential Tenanies Act of New Brunswick and The Property Act of New Brunswick.
Share
Transcript
  CourtFileNumber: MlC/0642f09 INTHECOURTOFQUEEN'SBENCHOFNEWBRUNSWICKTRIALDIVISIONJUDICIALDISTRICTOFMONCTONBETWEEN:ROYALDANKOFCANADA & 501376N.D. Ltd.,a body corporate, Plaintiffs,~and~ ANDREMURRAY, Defendant,AFFIDAVITI,GeorgeH.LeBlanc,of the City of Moncton,intheCountyofWestmorlandandProvinceofNewBrunswick,MAKEOATHANDSAYASFOLLOWS:1.IamapartnerwiththeLawFirmofCox&Palmer,representingthePlaintiffsinthismatterandassuchhaveapersonalknowledgeofthemattershereindeposedtoexceptwhereotherwisestated.ResJudicata2.Mr.MurrayfiledaMotionforLeavetoAppeal,seekingto set asidetheOrderof Mr. Justice Dionne datedOctober20 th, 2009.3.Attachedheretoandmarked A isacopyoftheNoticeofMotionforLeavetoAppeal(Form62A)signedbyAndreMurrayonOctober27 th, 2009,andfiled with theNewBrunswickCourtofAppeal.4.Attachedheretoand marked B isacopyoftheAffidavit of AndreMurraydatedOctober27 th, 2009filedinconnectionwithhisMotionforLeavetoAppealtotheCourtofAppeal.5.Attachedheretoandmarked C isacopyoftheDecisionofMr.JusticeRichardBell,datedDecember 3rd. 2009.6.IwaspresentandparticipatedintheMotionforLeavetoAppea1whichentailedadayandahalfofargumentbeforeMr.JusticeRichardBell.Aswillappearfromthesedocuments,substantiallythesameissuesandsubjectmatter,particularlyrelatingtoservice and  2 Mr.Murray'scontentionthathedidnothavenotice,wereraisedandarguedbyMr.MurraybeforeMr.JusticeBell. AlJg;edDelay in Efforts to Serve 7. WithrespecttoMr.Murray'scontentionthatwefailedtoattemptserviceoftheMotionbetweenSeptember18 th, 2009 toOctober Sth, 2009(referAffidavitof Andre MurraydatedDecember 4th, 2009atparagraphs 6-8), weforwardedoursignedMotiontotheClerkoftheCourt by correspondencedatedSeptember 17iJJ.,2009, acopyofwhichisannexedheretoandmarked 0 . 8.WedidnotreceivetheretwnedMotionfromtheClerk.oftheCourtuntilonoraboutOctober Sth or6 th, 2009. andweimmediatelyforwardedtheMotionforserviceonOctober6 th ,2009.Acopyofthatcorrespondenceisattachedheretoandmarked En. 9.Mr.Murrayraisedthisissueofallegeddelay in effortstoservebefore Mr. JusticeBelloftheCourtofAppealontheMotionforLeavetoAppeal.HewaspresentwhenIadvisedMr.JusticeBellofthecircumstancesregardingthetimebetweenthedateoffilingtheMotionandthedateofreceiptofsame,andwasthereforeawareofthisinformationwhenhefiledhisaffidavitalleging mischief...orbadfaith (referAffidavitofAndreMurray at paragraph7). AmendedMotionforValidatedorSubstitutedService 10.OnoraboutOctober13 16 ,2009,IcalledAtlanticDocumentServicetocheckonservice,andwasadvisedthattheprocessserverinFrederictonhadbeenunabletoeffectservicedespitenumerousefforts.Iexpressedmyconcernthatthedocwnents had not been servedandaskedtobeprovidedwithdetailsoftheeffortstoserve Mr. Murray.11.IrequestedthatacopyoftheCourtdocumentsbepostedtothedoorofthepremisesandimmediatelypreparedanAmendmenttotheMotionseekinganOrderforSubstitutedorValidatedService.12.TheamendmenttotheMotionseekinganOrderforSubstitutedorValidatedServicewasnecessitatedbytheinabilitytoeffectserviceupon Mr. Murrayatthepremises,theapparenteffortstoevadeservice,andalsotakingnoteoftheearliercircumstancesrelatingtoservicewithrespecttotheNoticetoVacatetheproperty.13.AsnotedintheoriginalMotiontoVacate,IwasadvisedbyHughK.Cameron,processserver,thatheattemptedtoserveAndreMurraywithaNoticetoVacateonoraboutJuly16 1hã 2009.HedeposedthatheaffixedacopyoftheNoticetoVacatetotheentrancedoor, and afterdoingsoitwasimmediatelyremovedbysomeoneinthehouse.A copy of that AffidavitofServicedatedJuly20 m, 2009, isattachedheretoandmarked F .  3 14.Mr.Murraylater confirmed tomethathehadreceivedtheNoticetoVacate,althoughheclaimedtohavereceiveditafewdayslater. 15. Mr.Murraynowdeniesthathewasservedwithsame,assetoutintheAffidavitof HughK. Cameron(referAffidavitof Andre MurrayofNovember 16 1h, 2009 atparagraphs 41 &42). 16. Mr. Murrayallegesatparagraph 102 ofhisAffidavitofNovember 16 1b, 2009 that I urposelyfalsifieddocuments in ordertoexpeditetheOrdersaskedfor... ,andthattheOrdersignedbytheCourtwasbased the falsepretence thattheCourtwasadvisedthattheAmendedNoticeofMotion had been served on Mr. Murray. 17. Atparagraph 10 ofhisAffidavitofDecember 4th, 2009. Mr. MurrayaccusestheundersignedofbadfaithandabuseofCourtprocedure,alleging that J crafted anOrderfortheCourt,falselyindicatingthattheAmendedNoticeofMotion had beenservedontheDefendant,AndreMurrayonthe 13th day of October. 2009 when in facttheAmendedMotiondidnotexistandhadneverbeen filed withtheCourtofQueen'sBench,TrialDivisionofMoncton. 18. Atparagraph 13 ofhisAffidavitofDecember 4 1b, 2009. Mr. Murraystatesthat: TheOrdercraftedbythesolicitorforthePlaintiffs,GeorgeLeBlanc...falselyindicatedthattheAmendedNoticeofMotionwasservedontheDefendant,when in fact it didnotatthattimeexist . 19.The AmendedMotionrequestedapprovalofSubstitutedServiceandlorValidationofServiceoftheNoticeofActionwithStatementofClaimAttachedandtheNoticeofMotionwithsupportingAffidavitsonly.Moreover,theAffidavits in supportofthe Amended MotionreferredtotheNoticeofActionwithStatementofClaimAttachedandoriginalNoticeofMotiononly.Thereferenceto the AmendedNoticeofMotion in the Order wasunnecessaryandin error. 20. AtnotimewasiteversuggestedorwastheCourtadvisedthatMr.MurrayhadbeenservedwiththeAmendedMotionregardingSubstitutedandlorValidatedService. 21.The processserver,Mr.Daneliuk,filedtwoAffidavitsontheMotion.HisfirstAffidavitclearlyindicatedthatatparagraph 15 thatonOctober 13th,2009, heaffixedacopyoftheNoticeofActionwithStatementofClaimAttached,theNoticeofMotion and supportingAffidavitstothefrontdoorofthepremises. 22. Moreover,theAffidavitofServiceprovidedtotheCourtalsostatedthatonOctober 13 thã 2009, Mr. DaneliukaffixedcopiesoftheNoticeofAction with StatementofClaimAttachedandNoticeofMotiontothefrontdoorofhisresidencelocatedat29MarshallStreet,Fredericton,NewBrunswick. In neithercasewasitsuggestedthattheAmendedNoticeof  4 MotionhadbeenservedonOctober13 th, 2009.Copiesofthe two Affidavitsof Mr. Daneliuk are attachedhereto and marked G . 23. Mr. MurrayraisedthisissuebeforeMr.JusticeRichardBelloftheCourtof Appeal, andwaspresentwhentheabovematterswerediscussed,andwasthereforeawareofthisinformationwhenhe filed hisAffidavitallegingthat I purposelyfalsifieddocumentsinorder to expeditetheOrdersaskedfor . AdditionalPriorNoticeofHearing 24.Mr. Murrayswearsthatheisnotawareofanyattemptstocontact him byphone,e-mailorletter with respecttotheMotion(referAffidavitofAndreMurraydatedNovember16 th, 2009atparagraph65).25.Giventhatourprocessserver had notbeenabletoserveMr.Murraydirectly,andnotwithstandingthemotionforSubstitutedorValidatedService,asanaddedprecautiononOctober16 th, 2009at8:29a.m.IforwardedacopyoftheNoticeofAction,NoticeofMotion,AmendedNoticeofMotion,andAffidavitsofBettyDanielski,HughCameron,JulieRuggieroandDaveDaneliuk(withoutexhibits)toMr.Murray to ane-mailaddressfromwhichhehadcontactedmeonanumberofoccasionspreviously,referexhibit H , 26.Ididnotreceiveanyelectronicnoticethatthesente-maildidnot go through.However,onOctober20 th, 2009,at3:24p.m.,beingthedateofthehearing,hesentmeane-mailfromthesamee-mailaddress,acopyofwhichisannexedheretoandmarked I .'27. Mr. Murray says thathemadenumerouscallstotheClerkoftheCourtinbothFredericton and Monctonpriortothehearing.IdidnotreceiveanytelephonecallfromMr.MurrayinthedaysleadinguptoandincludingOctober201ll,2009,althoughIhavereceivedtelephonecallsfromhimpreviously.28.[aminformedbymyassistant,CandyLeBlancanddoverilybelievethatonoraboutOctober21't,2009,justbefore1:00p.m.Mr.Murraycalledandspoketoherregardingthismatter.SheinformedmethatsheadvisedMr.Murrayrepeatedlythathewouldhavetospeakwithmedirectly.Sheindicatedthatsheaskedhimforhisphonenumberbuthedeclinedtoprovideit,indicating that Ialreadyhad it. PriorCommunication with Mr.Murray 29.PriortoproceedingwithaMotiontotheCourtforanOrderforEviction,Imadenumerouseffortstoworkwith Mr. Murray,tohavethepropertyvacatedcooperativelyratherthanproceeding to theCourt.
Related Search
Similar documents
View more
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x