Kueber v RVH and The Gang

I’ve set up a new website, I’m getting organized for the next round,   https://kuebervroyalvictoriaregionalhealthcentre.wordpress.com

I read, and I studied, I even saw, how others have published their factums, I didn’t see any reason why I couldn’t publish the factum for my appeal.  Admittedly, it’s not perfect, I got a bit rushed and sleep deprived, but I got to dust it off a bit and with oral arguments I feel pretty good about it but, after the appeal, it could still drag on for years, thanks to their “scorch the earth” tactics, they’re perfectly willing to spend 5x as much taxpayers’ money as the possible settlement, to be certain their victims never live to collect a dime.

Factum of the Appellant  (an unsigned, proposed copy to satisfy deficiencies raised by counsel during an appeal motion hearing conducted via telecom.)

Factum of the Appellant

Factum of the Respondent Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre  [with emphasis added]

Factum of the Respondent Barrie Medical Clinics Inc.

Factum of the Respondent of the Defendant Physicians

Factum of the Respondent of the County of Simcoe Paramedic Services

Schedule “A” Factum of the Respondent of the County of Simcoe Paramedic Services

Cost submissions, maximum 7 pages 🙂

 Cost Submissions of all parties & Cost Endorsement ONSC Sept 20, 2017


Here’s a summary of cases I relied on in the Ontario Superior Court, I filed this spread-sheet with the court during one of the 5 days of summary judgment.  I should point out, the stuff filed for November 2015 was for the hearing in writing that I was permitted during the August 10, 2015 case teleconference, transcript not available (more like a feeding-frenzy) but that motion was never heard, there was another case management (more like plaintiff management) conference, and I got hit with costs and blocked from bringing motions, for trying to bring a motion in writing to determine matters in advance of the 2 remaining summary hearings.    Summary of brief material relied on, filed in court

Initially, all parties agreed to have the hearings severed, to split the hospital off since their motion, and my cross-motion were only partial motions, neither were seeking dismissal, and yet, based on the cost endorsement just released by the Ontario Superior Court, instead of a Bullock or Sanderson order, the court essentially ended the rest of my case, this, after practically stating that MY motion, my motion proving that Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre failed to meet the standard of care required by a public hospital, in the province of Ontario, that motion, was successful at the close of hearings.

Admittedly, I don’t read every decision handed down any longer but, in my understanding Sanzone v. Schechter, 2016 ONCA 566 is still supra, like it was when it was drawn to the attention of the court by counsel, at my request. The View from one Canadian – Sanzone v. Schechter published July 13, 2016.

So, that’s why it’s difficult to understand how the hospital was successful and I, would be barred from justice, were it not that I scrounged and redirected and spent another 1200 hours on this appeal.

Is this what you call justice?

Is this what you call fair and equal access to justice?

Ontario, where our “independent” authorized transcribers, who pay, what is it? $0.05 per photocopied page, are allowed to extort, $4.86 per photocopied page, this is Ontario’s idea of providing fair and equal access to justice?

Oh ya, I considered your offer, duly…. forget it!

I trust you all got my withdrawal of offer to settle.  Like I said, getting paralyzed wasn’t even considered, nor were the costs of my long-term care, should I be so lucky as to need it.

My injured life, may well still be worth a mere $361,000, at best, yes, at best my destroyed life is worth a few thousand hours of legal work, this is my Canada, and this is how much they value, we, the people.


Having read the first factum, I thought it might be useful to post my

  Notice of Appeal

 Supplementary Notice of Appeal

October 10, 2017

Well, I was so pleased everyone seemed so responsible, we have that mutual agreement for electronic service, after I invested 1200 hours scanning in a copy of all the appeal material, all of it except that stuff that wasn’t properly served, as required by the rules, I can’t imagine why I just got 9 separate packages, over a foot of material from just one of the publicly funded defendants, one who would rely quite heavily on material not properly served, or filed in Superior Court, an over 10 hours+ of attendance for a tag-team cross-examination marathon.

I also got material from the hospital so I’m just waiting on the defendant physicians, then think I’ll need to motion to exclude some evidence, I read those rules, even SRLs are entitled to those certified copies, and I still haven’t had a response on my request to have our appeal declared electronic, since all the work is done and there is several feet of material, dragging 100s of pounds of material around is no longer an option, I really don’t understand why that would be refused, if need-be, I will ask for accommodation for my physical disabilities.

Here’s a copy of the Notice of Motion – Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre which seems relevant having just reviewed their factum.


I couldn’t find any precedent but, I’m going to rely on it anyway, in the absence of opposing counsel, I had the right to provide clarifying statements for the record.

So this one, Rules of Civil Procedure, RRO 1990, Reg 194, s 34.11  <http://canlii.ca/t/52gx1#sec34.11> retrieved on 2017-10-11

On Examination for Discovery

34.11 (1) A person being examined for discovery may be re-examined by his or her own lawyer and by any party adverse in interest to the examining party.  R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 34.11 (1); O. Reg. 575/07, s. 3.

On Cross-Examination on Affidavit or Examination in Aid of Execution

(2) A person being cross-examined on an affidavit or examined in aid of execution may be re-examined by his or her own lawyer.  R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 34.11 (2); O. Reg. 575/07, s. 3.

Timing and Form

(3) The re-examination shall take place immediately after the examination or cross-examination and shall not take the form of a cross-examination.  R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 34.11 (3).


Citation: Browne v. Dunn, 1893 CanLII 65 (FOREP), <http://canlii.ca/t/h6kw6>, retrieved on 2017-10-22

(certainly took your time posting that one Canlii!)


I’m still waiting on the last responding factum for my appeals based on “errors in law”.


Here’s the Endorsed Discovery Plan

Here’s the Summary Motion Timetable

(3) No other document need be served personally, or by an alternative to personal service, unless these rules or an order require personal service or an alternative to personal service.  R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 16.01 (3).

(4) Any document that is not required to be served personally or by an alternative to personal service,

(a) shall be served on a party who has a lawyer of record by serving the lawyer, and service may be made in a manner provided in rule 16.05;

(b) may be served on a party acting in person or on a person who is not a party,

(i) by mailing a copy of the document to the last address for service provided by the party or other person or, if no such address has been provided, to the party’s or person’s last known address,

(ii) by personal service or by an alternative to personal service,

(iii) by use of an electronic document exchange of which the party or person is a member or subscriber, but, where service is made under this subclause between 4 p.m. and midnight, it is deemed to have been made on the following day, or

(iv) if the parties consent or the court orders under subrule 16.06.1 (2), by e-mailing a copy to the party or person in accordance with subrule 16.06.1 (1), but, where service is made under this subclause between 4 p.m. and midnight, it is deemed to have been made on the following day. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 16.01 (4); O. Reg. 260/05, s. 3; O. Reg. 575/07, s. 15; O. Reg. 170/14, s. 3.


Some of you, if you’re following this page, may indeed be wondering, will you bore us to death, I mean, what’s next, affidavits of service?!!  Indeed, that is next, affidavits of service, coming up this afternoon, unless I get hacked again!

I haven’t forgotten about those “responding” factums but I still don’t have them all and only one was served with the required electronic factum so, I’m waiting.

Affidavit of Service – Moving Party – County of Simcoe Paramedic Services

Affidavit of Service – Moving Party – “Defendant Physicians”


Look what I found!  November 12, 2015 Plaintiff’s trial management submission

Coming soon, my motion.


I’m adding the factums of the Respondents to the top.  I do have them all but I haven’t yet scanned in the one from the hospital.

November 15, 2017

The Court of Appeal said I could bring a motion in front of a single judge last week so I spent the weekend creating new motion material based on alternative relief.

I’m polling counsel again to ask if they would agree to argue in writing based on the new draft Notice of Motion, I’m even trying to accommodate counsels’ very busy schedules, though I understand there is no requirement for that.


November 20, 2017

So, I duly served a Notice of Motion returnable December 7, 2017 on November 15, 2017, for a motion in front of a single judge.  Counsel strongly objected and threatened me with costs (oh, there’s something novel!), so, I agreed to serve a Notice of Motion returnable December 20, 2017, in accordance with the Rules.


Kueber v. Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre et al. – Case Management Timetable (amended)

Here’s how that went for me, I was on the phone, most of the defendants traveled to Barrie so they could appear in person before the justice, really, it couldn’t have been more fair, though I’ve been accused of being sarcastic on occasion.   Trial Management Transcript – November 13, 2015 (excerpt)


December 1, 2017

Assuming I can actually make it over to the post office, the motion material for the motion returnable December 20, 2017 is going out today.


December 11, 2017

So, there was an interesting development today, according to one of the defendants, my motion was not sent for filing properly.  Now, this wouldn’t really be all that interesting except in the court below, Rules were things I was expected follow, now, the hens may finally be coming home to roost, since ya’ll bring up the Rules, I wonder how impressed the court will be with your affidavits of service…for stuff you knew you were late on.  I on the other hand, a disabled SRL facing 4 law firms, wasn’t permitted to file my responding factum, served after 4 pm.

Now I can’t afford to serve and file again, or get back and forth into town and spend half the day riding around town so I can swear out another affidavit, and subsistence disability pension day isn’t until December 20, 2017 so, I’ll bring along a copy of those tracking details and you can fight to keep those off the record, I’ll be sure you all get copies (far be it from me to have to stoop to sand-bagging) and moreover, it will give ya’ll something else to complain about.  The dates are July 3, July 6, Sept 1, Sept 2, and Sept 18, 2015.

So, late today, after one of the defendants kindly informed me my motion was being rejected by the Court of Appeal, I contacted the Registrar via the EFile and resent my affidavit of service.  I’m confident it is only the wording I used on my cover-letter coupled perhaps with the slack-ass service from Canada Post, and that my emailed affidavit of service didn’t get matched with my motion material.


[22]           It is not just the duty of judges to ensure that all parties receive a fair hearing.  Lawyers are required to do so as well.  Counsel are not required to assist parties opposite on matters of substance.  Nor do they need to make or even to ensure that the parties opposite understand the strategic choices that might be available to them.  But, they are required to assist on scheduling and similar matters to ensure that the other side has an opportunity to present his or her evidence fairly.  It is the fairness of the process that differentiates the justice system from a street fight or trial by battle.  Lawyers are not just hired guns.  They are professionals who advance our system of civil justice that is premised upon fairness, efficiency, affordability, and proportionality.  To ensure a just outcome, all parties are entitled to a fair opportunity to present their cases in a fair hearing.  It is the responsibility of all of the participants in the legal system, lawyers, judges, and court administration to strive to ensure a fair outcome.  I have no doubt that the defendants’ counsel will fulfill their roles as advocates in accordance with the best traditions of the bar.

 Source: Solomon v Abughaduma, 2015 ONSC 7670 (CanLII), par. 22, <http://canlii.ca/t/gmh27#par22>, retrieved on 2017-12-12.

Well holy website hits!

Seriously though, you guys better study and start following those rules, seriously.

Yours ever so truly,

Barbara Kueber, SRL


So, the Court of Appeal recently said in a proper case they would consider the use of the audio as opposed to a written transcript, @ $4.86 per photocopied or original page.  Well, I submit this is such a case, I was put on trial, without a shred of evidence, just bald assertions, and the officers of the court were allowed to give testimony, without ever being sworn.

Anyway, it’s all there, in the cost endorsement, it shows even after finally releasing the further reasons, the justice hearing the motion didn’t understand whose burden it was on motion, nor did he appreciate how invalid the hired-gun testimony was, which, if accepted clearly pointed to a lack of standard of care either on the part of the clinic, or her doctors.  Then in the further reasons, at para 6-7 he says, he didn’t have to consider my evidence because the defendants met their burden, clearly, he didn’t appreciate that if the defendants met their burden, the burden was then passed on to me.

At the close of hearings the justice hearing the motions indicated I was successful with my partial motion against the Royal Victoria Regional Health Centre, that I was successful in proving they failed to meet the standard of care expected of a public hospital in the province of Ontario.  It is my submission, this case is perfectly suited to have portions of the court audio record of the 5 days of summary motions, entered into evidence.


December 13, 2017

Oh, how sweet it is.  Check out the affidavit sworn by the 2nd lawyers at Lerners LLP, I’ll post the retraction to the material misrepresentation that I evaded service a bit later, I have bunch of stuff to scan in.  Who’d have thought that UPS would fake up their records (though I have should have remembered that incident with the General Manager of United Chemicon and that plate of bird-seed I was served at that posh restaurant over that incident) ….further commentary regarding the conduct  is redacted, seriously, judge for yourself.

Sure no trouble, I mean why should you include the correct index, or numbered pages on your motion record, I mean you can do or say anything it seems!!

Ms. Sarah Martens – Affidavit August 25, 2015

***link added Feb 16, 2018, I just noticed this richness, there is quite a bit but, I especially enjoyed this part here, with emphasis added:

15. We immediately worked to rectify the incorrect Index in the Defendant physicians’
Motion Record, which had the wrong list of Exhibits to my Affidavit affirmed on July 2, 2015.  All other information in the Index was correct and I verily believe that the errors were insignificant as the Exhibits were plain and obvious from reading my Affidavit. Only July 21, 2015, our office served an Amended Index on all parties, as well as delivering a copy to the Court. A true copy of the letter to ail parties dated July 21, 2015 is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C”.

Original Motion Record Index – Sent for service to SRL via courier on July 2, 2015

July 21, 2015 Cover letter and tracking for service or material due to be served and filed by July 3, 2015,  in accordance with the Rules.


Amended Notice of Motion – Returnable December 20, 2017

Factum of the Moving Party – Appellant / Plaintiff

Motion Record Index – Moving Party – Appellant / Plaintiff


Well holy website hits!

So, indeed, I’m setting up a new website.

I haven’t kept this up to date.  I’m going to post the whole story about the case and the summary motion below, and the evidence by defendant (you can each have your own page) but briefly, after I filed the motion I constructed to be heard by 3 justices, the registrar told me I was wrong and I had to put my motion in front of a single justice.  So I did, but,  turns out it the registrar also set the motion down as “for directions”, the justice said my motion should have been brought before 3 justices, and I got slammed with costs again, even though I was partly successful to boot!  And I can’t imagine how that motion material got filed, aren’t you supposed to serve stuff first…see they’re still doing like they did below, what ever they wanted.

Late service, wrong index, unnumber pages in motion records never remedied, no 53.03 2.1 compliance, no duty of experts filed, no expert opinions, transcripts not properly entered, 911 records not properly entered, medical records never served or properly entered….and I’ve been trying to release defendants since 2014….it’s beyond broken, it is indeed an abject failure, a complete betrayal, a systemic failure.

So, I brought the fact the registrar told me to put my motion before a single justice to the attention of the justice, but that didn’t seem to matter, at all.

Anyway I got to file a 10 page reply factum and supplementary brief of authorities and a new detailed table of contents


I’ve set up a new website, I’m getting organized for the next round.

https://kuebervroyalvictoriaregionalhealthcentre.wordpress.com

18 thoughts on “Kueber v RVH and The Gang

  1. Your factum is so well done Barb. Better than any lawyers I have ever seen. I am so sorry for you pain and suffering and wish you Justice.

    Like

    1. Thank you Judy. I certainly wish you the same and can’t imagine the courage it took you to speak about your ordeal, about being forced to try to get justice for yourself, after one over-sightless, unaccountable, institutional failure after another.
      As for the “factum from hell!” well it literally evolved, I hate foot-notes, but during a hearing, they all started talking about the “hard-copy” stuff filed on the record, (and I know why! 🙂 ) when I had thousands of pages never printed, and entered that way in superior court. Turns out you can’t amend a factum, who knew?! I submit, they did, but they, didn’t even have to file factums, they already got more time to argue, not sure what they plan to argue, but I have less time relatively, and they have more. I hope they don’t all serve me days before the appeal, the rules seem really confusing, or, maybe it’s just us SRLs that are required to follow them. I found that a big problem when I was able to get summary advice in time to be any good, the court just ignored it, like, oh, the court not allow that unnumbered motion record to be filed, actually, they will.

      Like

  2. i CAN imagine your pain. I had to do much the same against Vancouver general. What a bunch of liars!! And the courts allow this,,,even supports it. Then they try to suggest that if we just had a lawyer, we could get justice. Not so, lawyers are all part of the system,, and no one wants to help the person trying to get justice, they will drag it on, claim they don’t know how to examine the evidence.. not be available, and on and on. If you just get fed up and handle it yourself, you will be, as we both were, summary judgemented out of court and kicked to the curb. Called vexatious and not let back in. I tried to file an appeal, the clerk at the court of appeal refused to give me a file number so I could not serve anyone. They now have my appeal listed as “abandoned”. They are all criminals, and these are the people running the courts. There is no justice, only a mockery of it. Every government body will help these “agents of the court”

    I prefer the think of them as ” agents of the devil”, to avoid the consequences of their behavior. Unless they are all penalized, and severely, they will not change their behavior. A good kick to the curb for them and the medical establishment need a few less of those dishonest and outright self obsorbed doctors and nurses. No career should entitle you to destruction of a persons life. as a PERK.

    Like

    1. Sounds like you had a pretty rough time of our justice system Sandra. I haven’t heard too many good experiences from SRLs, have you shared your story? I don’t think it’s any one problem, it’s the entire culture with ingrained bias and protectionism.
      By talking about these problems and the unfairness we face and our unique challenges as a group, because clearly SRLs are here to stay, we can start to fix them. If we keeping griping about crap under our breaths, nothing much is going to change for the better and I for one think we’ve got enough changing for the worse!

      I hope by going public with my very real, very live, clearly meritorious case, others can learn from it.

      Across the board, we need to get our governments out of our personal business, and they need to start doing their jobs, one of those jobs is giving over-sight for their systems, their ministry, their monsters, it’s not harassment and abuse of, we, the people, they are supposed to help us, not bar us from justice, or provide some mock version of it to appease the audience.

      Like

      1. i did have a VERY difficult time with the justice system, I continue to do so today. They do not like criticism, and I have criticized them. As have so many on the self represented web site. It is operated out of Windsor university. The people in this system are not interested in justice, my observation is, they are very interested in slandering and maligning anyone with the nerve to speak up. The entire government body is dedicated to silencing anyone who speaks up. The change of governing body is irrelevant. The people who are the clerks and the staff, run everything, And they do not like what is being said. The dishonesty, lies, subtrafuge, in their actions against the public generally shows that they are not going to change voluntarily. Unless we find a way to remove them all,, not much is going to change. They are the minions who support the actual organization of dishonesty, and corruption. Julie Macpharlen who runs the national self represented web page, is now suggesting that we make the treatment of the self represented a social issue, I agree, what do you think, if you agree, perhaps you have an idea on how.

        Like

      2. As far as I know “NSRLP is currently funded by the Law Foundation of Ontario, a private donor group, and the University of Windsor, Faculty of Law. The NSRLP aligns with Windsor Law’s mandate to promote Access to Justice for all Canadians.” in my understanding Professor Macfarlane began the project and her group has done a lot to help and bring awareness to the unique challenges facing Self Represented Litigants, SRLs, and they’ve convinced some lawyers to work on a per task fee basis, it’s a step in the right direction. They were involved in Citation: Pintea v. Johns, 2017 SCC 23 (CanLII), , retrieved on 2017-10-06
        I went on the record during 1 of 5 days of summary judgment about the issues I had with filings and getting support.
        It takes courage to stand up, but I submit access to justice is worth fighting for.
        Access to justice is a human right, in my opinion.

        Like

      3. yes, unfortunately., they are funded, by the university and the law society. So. I have great respect for her work, but she is influenced somewhat by the law society rules. As you know, the legal community does not like criticism . Access to justice is not just a human right, it is a constitutional right, even though the judicial system laughs at anyone claiming this. Our charter gives us access to justice with no blocks on it. As we well know,, it is all blocks out there.

        Like

      4. I’m sure you’re correct, they don’t like criticisms, but I heard, they like embarrassing inquiries even less.
        I am confident, if need be, I will be successful in the Court of Appeal for Ontario if the matter doesn’t settle before that. There are multiple defendants that could have been released years ago, we all could have been getting on with our lives by now but instead we’re making lawyers rich.

        Like

  3. won’t be surprised if they are monkeying around with the site. they will do almost anything. look forward to hearing from your new site. I just tried to log on , couldn’t get in.

    Like

  4. please check out my web site if you get a minute, it is on youtube. Sandra olson dna fraud errors. the side show of what happens to those who are run over by the liars in the medical industry is portrays by how then, we are re victimized by the legal industry, Same story,, different characters

    Like

  5. Feb 15, 2018….Getting ready to apply to the Supreme Court of Canada, in an effort to change a few things. Despite my lack of time, energy, and inspiration to answer questions lately, I’ve managed to hold to my spot as most read writer in Medical Cannabis on Quora! https://www.quora.com/topic/Medical-Cannabis/writers
    Working on the new site, trying to get everything organized …who knows, maybe somebody will help me, it’s not completely beyond the realm of things that could happen. Our laws desperately need to change, we can’t put plaintiffs with meritorious claims through this kind of abuse, torture, and out and out discrimination, it is a disgrace, to the entire justice system, no justice, no peace..no access to justice, no justice. https://kuebervroyalvictoriaregionalhealthcentre.wordpress.com

    Like

  6. the actions you are seeing by the hospital and physicians supported by a corrupt judicial system are strikingly familiar to me, I had an action filed in court here in BC. some of the defendents were Vancouver general hospital , several physicians and or just geneticists, depending on who you believe is actually a doctor. I filed an appeal of the lower court decision with the court of appeal, by fax, I was told 3 times that there was no file being submitted, by the court staff. I had court fax confirmation of receipt files. you know, your fax kicks back a confirmation of sent document. to this day, the court of appeal refuses to admit they received my file. In order to win, in the lower court, one of the apposing counsels upon getting served notice of discovery, transferred the file out to another court without notifiying me,and while I was sitting in the Chilliwack court house waiting for their arrival for our examination,, he was in the Burnaby court having it dismissed because I wasn’t there. I had the booked room confirmation when I refiled back in Chilliwack. The judge never said one word about it. He then declared me vexatious for coming back to the court, and ordered that I never do it again, and triple costs were awarded against me, even though the courts had already declared me indigent by order,, and no further costs were to be paid by me. It is all so corrupt It makes me ill.

    Like

    1. Our justice system seems to be leaving a trail of destroyed SRLs and families, to top off all their other biases, depending largely on their own background and where they live. The old-boyz nudge-nudge wink-wink seems to be very much alive in our judiciary, and there is not one avenue of recourse for most SRLs.
      In a case similar to mine, it wouldn’t be unexpected that the lawyers, who aren’t yet judges, could bill 4-5 million for one action, leaving me with maybe 4-5 million for the rest of my life, included care costs, after they essentially, and intentionally, destroyed my entire life, because I dared to tape them during the commission of their malpractice, fraud and patient abuse.
      Now that we know about all those botched MotherRisk program test results, that tore so many families apart thanks to the phony or inadequate “expert reports”, we can add that pile of bodies to all the others stacking up in family court and stack them all against a pile of money.
      If any side in a litigation can use a stack of money or just plain cheating and judicial bias in their favor, and win, we have a problem, a huge problem and, we need to address it before they just exclude all Canadians not able or willing to feed millions into a literal trough for the lawyers, even as they still, in many cases refuse fees for those lowly, and pesky self-represented litigants, SRLs.
      Once a case is deemed meritorious, they should not be allowed to pervert justice with a stack of money, and, if our judiciary is unable to fairly decide cases involving SRLs due their own deeply in-grained biases, we need to have an alternate means of accessing justice in Canada, one with over-sight, and access to it, yes, even for us lowly, and pesky SRLs.
      We have so many stories in Canada about overt discrimination against SRLs, why aren’t the papers writing about that too? I’ll tell you why, the public never, ever hears our story….it’s the one they want published, in that echo chamber, they’re all so warm and happy in.
      Thanks for sharing your story Sandra!
      Barb Kueber – SRL

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s