This is a working draft that we're working on as we crack open a cold one and enjoy the show as the Predator Potato (and alleged pedophile) Jonathan Yaniv finally gets his just desserts. This is gonna be good, enjoy the show!

There have been some recent interesting developments in the case of the vexatious and allegedly pedophilic litigant Jonathan Yaniv. On or about October 10th, 2019 counsel for Morris & Szuchs named the rehabilitation equipment manufacturers as liable parties, as the allegation of Jonathan was that the therapy bed "broke in half" when he sat down on it.

The rough timeline is as follows:

  • 20190904 — Notice of Claim
    Our munchkin Jonathan tries his shakedown on The Physiotherapist Corp.
     
  • 20190904 — Company Search
  • 20190904 — Company Search

     
  • 20190917 — Reply
    Counsel for the Respondents replies to the alleged pedophile Dr Yaniv
     
  • 20191010 — Third Party Notice
    Counsel for the Respondents names the manufacturers as ultimately liable
  • 20191010 — Company Search
  • 20191010 — Company Search
    These are presumably the Respondent entering the specifics of the manufacturers into the docket
     
  • 20191011 — Certificate of Readiness
    Respondents are ready to rumble
     
  • 20191028 — Correspondence
  • 20191104 — Certificate of Service
  • 20191104 — Certificate of Service
    These puzzled me at first, but it looks like they're for material testimony relating to Dr Yaniv's relevant prior nature
     
  • 20191202 — Reply to Third Party Notice - MEDELCO INC
  • 20200228 — Schedule — Settlement Conference:
      - 1.) Notice of Claim
      - 5.) Third Party Notice

 

Comments

Anonymous (not verified), Fri, 11/15/2019 - 23:25
When a party’s attorney files any document with the court, copies of the document have to be served on all the other parties (by mail usually, though nowadays electronic filing allows for automatic service). A certificate of service is a document that states all the other parties were served.
Anonymous (not verified), Fri, 11/15/2019 - 23:26
Did you purchase any of the documents?
We're averse to unnecessary expenditure, so we're reaching out to counsel for the parties, seeing if we can work out an agreement for docs as they break.
Will try to negotiate the terms of any disclosure agreement to minimize redactions we have to make.

However, the puzzle is much bigger than this one case, and it might be more far-reaching than people are aware.. consider who might be involved, consider the troon's age, and then consider the reason behind a high-priced law-firm would be playing intercept for the wannabe kiddie-fucker.

If we do resort to crowd-funding our expenses for disclosure, it will only be as a last resort because the BC Online system is a piece of shit. You have to pay 6CAD to even view the list of available documents, and then pay an additional $6 for each document that will only be available once it is scanned into the system by the staff.

And, the session times out in something like 60 minutes, so you'll wind up being billed to an exorbitant extent, even if there are no new files. So I'm contacting not only counsel for the parties, but also might try to reach out to BCO and bring up the fact that disclosure is mandatory in this case, as it's a matter of public concern/safety.

FOIPPA S25: Public Interest Paramount
https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/laws/stat/rsbc-1996-c-165/latest/rsbc-1996-c-165.html#sec25

They should not be profiting off their holding hostage a matter of public interest, so I'm not feeding them my bills on principle. There are ways around it.