From: johnturmel@gmail.com   
      
   TURMEL: Crown pushes for separate Harris-Mozajko appeals   
      
   JCT: Even though the Crown pointed out the identical issues   
   in the Harris and Mozajko appeal to the Court, when Igor   
   asked the Court to be joined with the Harris appeal, the   
   Crown now tries to ignore. In a letter from Jon Bricker on   
   March 21:   
      
   Department of Justice   
   March 21 2019   
   Igor Mozajko   
      
   Dear Mr. Mozajko   
      
   Re: MOZAJKO, Igor and Attorney General of Canada   
   File No: A-339-18   
      
   I confirm receipt of your March 13 2018(!) letter.   
      
   It appears from your letter that you do not intend to file a   
   memorandum of fact and law as respondent and cross-   
   appellant. Accordingly, and pursuant to rule 347(1), can you   
   kindly provide me a list of dates remaining in March, April   
   May or June when you are unavailable to attend a hearing of   
   this matter in Toronto. I propose we request a three-hour   
   hearing. However, please advise if you believe that a longer   
   or shorter hearing is required.   
      
   Kindly provide me with this information by end of day Friday   
   March 22 in order that I may file a Requisition for hearing   
   by March 26 filing deadline.   
      
   Finally, be advised that I reserve the right at the oral   
   hearing to object to any arguments by you on the grounds   
   that the arguments have not been raised in a memorandum of   
   fact and law as respondent and cross-appellant.   
   Yours truly,   
   Jon Bricker   
      
      
   JCT: So Igor faxed back his response:   
      
   Igor Mozajko   
   Respondent (Cross-Appellant)   
      
   Monday March 25 2019   
   VIA FACSIMILE   
      
   Jon Bricker   
   Fax: 416-973-0809   
      
   RE: Mozajko v. HMTQ No: A-339-18   
      
   In your March 21 letter, you wrote:   
       It appears from your letter that you do not intend to   
       file a memorandum of fact and law as respondent and   
       cross-appellant.   
      
   It also appears that I intend to rely on the memorandum of   
   fact and law of Allan J. Harris. My own memorandum would   
   simply be following his template.   
      
       Accordingly, and pursuant to rule 347(1), can you kindly   
       provide me a list of dates remaining in March, April May   
       or June when you are unavailable to attend a hearing of   
       this matter in Toronto.   
      
   I have asked the Court to expedite my appeal to that of   
   Harris whose Requisition for hearing is filed. I proffered   
   the same dates for my hearing with his as you did for his.   
      
       Finally, be advised that I reserve the right at the oral   
       hearing to object to any arguments by you on the grounds   
       that the arguments have not been raised in a memorandum   
       of fact and law as respondent and cross-appellant.   
      
   The Court hasn't yet decided whether I will be heard with   
   Harris. Why would I request a hearing on my own without any   
   Memoranda yet filed when you ask to object to my arguments   
   on the grounds that the arguments have not been raised in a   
   memorandum? If I am not expedited to join Harris to rely on   
   his Memorandum, I'll file my own copy of his Memorandum   
   before we request any hearing.   
   ________________   
   Igor Mozajko   
      
   JCT: Imagine asking him to help them with their Request for   
   Hearing before he gets a decision his original request to   
   the Court to join the Harris appeal and before his   
   Memorandum is filed.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)