From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   TURMEL: FCC nixes Repeal Summary Judgment Motion, FCA appeal   
      
   JCT: In my post: Merry Christmas Motion for REPEAL Summary   
   Judgment, I wrote how I'd filed a Motion for Summary   
   Judgment for Repeal of Cannabis prohibition against Her   
   Majesty in Default of filing a Statement of Defence.   
      
   So I filed a Notice of Appeal yesterday:   
                                             File No: _________   
                                                  FCC: T-488-14   
      
                     FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL   
   BETWEEN:   
      
                          JOHN C. TURMEL   
      
                                                      Appellant   
                               and   
      
                        HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   
                                                     Respondent   
      
                         NOTICE OF APPEAL   
                      Pursuant to Rule 27.(1)(c)   
      
   TO THE RESPONDENT:   
      
   A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by the   
   appellant. The relief claimed by the appellant appears on   
   the following page.   
      
                                APPEAL   
      
   1. THE APPELLANT APPEALS to the Federal Court of Appeal from   
   the Jan 5 2015 Direction of Federal Court Justice Michael   
   Phelan that the Registry refuse to accept Plaintiff's Motion   
   for Summary Judgment because "there is no provision for   
   Summary Judgment Motions in a simplified action."   
      
   THE APPELLANT ASKS that the Court overturn the Order and   
   permit the motion to be heard.   
      
   THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL are that the action is no longer   
   simplified as of April 29 2014 when Plaintiff's motion was   
   granted with Crown consent by Justice Phelan to strike   
   "Simplified Action" from the Statement of Claim.   
      
   Dated at Brantford on Wednesday Jan 4 2015.   
   John C. Turmel, B.Eng.,   
      
   JCT: Maybe Justice Phelan forgot he had struck "Simplified   
   Action" from my Statement of Claim with Crown consent at   
   the Big Event. After all, my record shows no entry that my   
   motion had been dealt with. Here's the motion Justice Phelan signed off on   
   with Crown   
   consent:   
                                           File No: T-488-14   
                         FEDERAL COURT   
   BETWEEN:   
                        JOHN C. TURMEL   
                                                   Applicant   
                              and   
      
                     HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   
                                                  Respondent   
                         NOTICE OF MOTION   
      
   TAKE NOTICE THAT at 11am on Tuesday April 29 2014 will be   
   heard Applicant's urgent short notice motion at the   
   Federal Court at 180 Queen St. W. Toronto.   
      
   THE MOTION SEEKS to delete "This is a Simplified Action"   
   hand-written on the Statement of Claim upon the   
   insistence of the Registry.   
      
   THE GROUNDS ARE THAT the Statement of Claim was perfect   
   when proffered for filing and only at the insistence of   
   the Registry was the unnecessary addition inscribed.   
   Dated at Brantford on Thursday April 24 2014.   
   John C. Turmel, B.Eng.,   
      
   JCT: It probably got shunted into the "deal with after   
   Allard" file despite having been granted. And then he   
   forgot? Or he's wasting time on purpose. So guess what else   
   I can to get around his blockade.   
      
   Last funny part. Remember my other motion to alert the Crown   
   and the Clerks about their screw-ups:   
      
   THE MOTION SEEKS AN ORDER:   
   B) instructing the Attorney General and Registry staff that   
   a Direction by a Judge is appealable to three Judges even if   
   a Direction by a Prothonotary to one Judge is not;   
      
   JCT: The Federal Court of Appeal let it in because a   
   Direction is always given within an Order!   
      
   I even wrote a letter to Chief Justice Blais asking him to   
   advise his staff of what they didn't know.   
      
   So guess what happened yesterday when a buddy went in to   
   file my Notice of Appeal. Again, the clerks refused because   
   a "Direction" isn't listed in the documents you can appeal,   
   just Orders! Har har har har har har. So it was sent up for   
   direction to again, no doubt, be let in.   
      
   But doesn't it make Justice Blais seem unheeding now that he   
   has to have a special direction issued to correct the Clerk   
   error once again. There will be a Direction letting it in   
   now! Har har har. I'll have to start bringing copies of the   
   last one with me to school the clerks since the judges   
   won't.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)