By the time Donald and his son Craig brought in a new lawyer, Robert Sawers, the legal landscape was already tilted in their favor. The plaintiffs had tripped over the very first hurdle — standing — and no amount of legal acrobatics could change the fact that the claim had been fatally defective from day one.
Sawers understood this immediately. Just letting time pass, waiting for Elizabeth MacInnis to push this frivolous case forward. Then MacInnis did just what we were waiting for, she made a request for Donald Broder and Craig Broder to provide consent for her to file the Certificate of Readiness and close the pleadings within this action. Sawers requested a reasonable amount of time to make a trial by Jury Application, not because Donald and Craig needed one, but as a strategic safeguard. With a jury trial in play, procedural rights became locked in, and the defendants could hold firm on their advantage.
Then came the decisive move: a Rule 129 Application to have the lawsuit dismissed outright. The grounds were blunt and unambiguous. The action was frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of the court’s process because the plaintiffs, acting in their personal capacities, had no legal right to sue over estate property.
Wachowich order
Chief Justice A. H. Wachowich ORDERED THAT:
The Defendants’ application for a jury trial is dismissed,“because Donald Broder and Craig Broder just won the lawsuit and there will be no trial.”
2. Chief Justice A. H.Wachowich Orders – The Defendants’ application to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim under rule 129 shall be made on or before March 15, 2001. Wachowich extended the time to file the Certificate of Readiness and close the pleadings within this action to March 15, 2001. “Why waste the time preparing for trial if the claim has no standing?”
3. Chief Justice A. H.Wachowich Orders – the Lewis order that closed the pleadings within the action February 15, 2001 be extended to March 15, 2001,allowing time for the Defendants’ 129 application.
4. Chief Justice A. H.Wachowich Orders – that the Defendants have leave to reattend upon any Justice including himself for the purpose of extending the time in Paragraph 2 and 3 herein.MacInnis cannot extend the time because it was her that forced the pleadings closed on herself before Personal Representatives had been appointed and substitute as Plaintiff’s to this frivolous lawsuit.
The 129 application did not stand on rhetoric alone. Sawers anchored it in case law, pointing to Mugford v. Mugford, a Newfoundland Court of Appeal decision that struck down a nearly identical type of claim. In that ruling, the court had made it crystal clear:
“It is the role of the administrator and not the role of [a sibling] to put this to the test… The action was wrongly conceived… and ought not to have proceeded.”
The principle was simple. Only the estate’s legally appointed Personal Representative could sue on its behalf. The plaintiffs in Donald’s case had started the lawsuit without one. By law, that was the end of it.
Elizabeth MacInnis and Guy Lacourciere collude and ignore the Chief Justice A. H. Wachowich court order and collaborate to mislead the new case management judge Justice Marceau on May 17, 2003 that the Certificate of Readiness had been filed on April 17, 2003. Donald Broder and Craig Broder had not been approached to consent. If something was said the Defendants would have remembered and figured out that Wachowich order the Certificate of Readiness to be filed by March 15, 2001.
The Wachowich Order disappeared from the Edmonton Law Courts records and if you look below at the Wachowich Order below “I hereby certify this to be a true copy of the original order. Date this 5th day of March 2001.” This would have been the Order Robert Sawers requested following Elizabeth MacInnis filing it at Edmonton Law Courts. He would have been provided a copy with the court filed stamp but wanted a certified copy of the original Wachowich Order, contemplating it would go missing when MacInnis realized she had just ambushed herself by forcing the pleadings closed before she had applied for probate and appointed Personal Representatives to create legal standing to sue by substituting them as Plaintiff’s on this claim.
The Edmonton Commercial Crimes Unit, EPS, CPS, RCMP, Crimestoppers and the Law Society have all been made aware of this conspiracy to defraud Donald Broder and Craig Broder and just stand their with willful blindness, deaf ears and the look of stupidity on their face.
In the Court Order above paragraph 4. Justice Bielby orders the transcripts of the evidence given by Don Broder and Craig Broder at trial be referred to the Attorney General for an investigation. See the response below from the Attorney General Doug Schweitzer.
Marvelous Marvin Bloos of Beresh Depoe Cunningham “below” was on retainer for Donald Broder’s civil contempt hearings. He new this was all fake and took a $15,000.00 retainer to act as Donald Broder’s criminal lawyer then went to work in the conspiracy to frame, defraud and let Justice Myra Bielby and Elizabeth MacInnis jail an innocent elderly senior for whom was being jailed and defrauded because his lawyer Robert Sawers was being blamed for ambushing Elizabeth MacInnis.
“It’s been no bed of roses and no pleasure cruise”
