From: johnturmel@gmail.com   
      
   TURMEL: No security needed for plaintiffs   
      
   JCT: I've heard some people are wondering if the Crown's   
   request for security is meant for them. It's not. You'll   
   remember in my report on the Crown's Feb 11 letter:   
      
       Canada.. will also seek orders that the plaintiffs with   
       unpaid costs awards provide security for costs prior to   
       proceeding.   
      
   JCT: I commented:   
       That's aimed at my brother Ray who owes some court cost   
       judgments unpaid as yet that prevented another of his   
       actions from going forward.   
      
   JCT: So if you do not have an unpaid costs award like my   
   brother Ray, you are not one of of the plaintiffs with an   
   unpaid costs award. And no plaintiff who did nothing more th   
   an wait to see what happened to the Lead Plaintiff got hit   
   with costs, only the Lead Plainfiff.   
      
   I responded to the Case Management Judge on Feb 15:   
       The Defendant notes some plaintiffs have previous unpaid   
       judgments and ask that security be posted. Considering   
       the no-cash cost of emailling out a copy of the   
       documentation, after the first case is decided, those   
       plaintiffs could then decide if it is worth putting up   
       security.   
      
   JCT: So it only applies to anyone who did a template with me   
   in previous cases and went higher to get hit with costs. My   
   brother Ray is the only plaintiff I can think of. And Igor   
   Mozajko but his case is still on its way to the Supreme   
   Court. Can't call his unpaid yet.   
      
   So if you don't have any previous unpaid cost judgments, it   
   does not apply to you. It was purely a shot to inconvenience   
   my brother.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)