THIS IS NOTHING, BUT A JEWISH PLOT, AGAINST ME. TWO RACIST JEWS, WHO HAVE CONSPIRED, TO CAUSED ME HARM, BY FORCING ME, TO BE EVICTED, IN THEIR CONSPIRACY, TO DO ME HARM. ONE OF WHOM, LESLEY NAGODA, WHO THINKS, THAT I WAS SO MUCH, BENEATH HER, THE FOOL THAT SHE IS, THAT SHE HAS NEVER, ENDEAVERED, TO RETURN MY CALLS. BOY! WAS SHE EVER WRONG.
TORONTO LAWYER, ZOHAR LEVY, MUST HAVE BELIEVED, THAT HER CLIENTS, SHIP AND ITS CORRUPT AND INFAMOUS DIRECTOR, LESLEY NAGODA, HAS SO MUCH MONEY, (PUBLIC MONEY, FROM BEING A REGISTERED, PUBLIC CHARITY, AND RECEIVING FUNDING, FROM ALL THREE LEVELS, OF GOVERNMENT AND ALSO FROM, PRIVATE FUNDERS), TO PAY FOR THEIR LEGAL FEES, THAT AS A, GREEDY LAWYER, SHE WAS ALSO WILLING, TO TAKE THE RISK, OF GOING AGAINST, THE LAW SOCIETY'S, ETHICAL AND MORAL, CODE OF CONDUCT, AND TO GO MISSING IN ACTION, (MIA), OR TO MAKE HERSELF, UNAVAILABLE, AFTER HER CLIENTS SHIP AND LESLEY NAGODA, DIRECTED, THOSE UNDER HER, TO CARRY OUT AN, UNLAWFUL EVICTION, THAT ZOHAR LEVY, AS THEIR LAWYER, ON RECORD, HAD ALSO INSTIGATED, I BELIEVED AND HAS ALSO BEEN SILENT ABOUT IT, EVER SINCE. ZOHAR LEVY, SHOWED, A LACK OF INTEGRITY, IN DELIBERATELY, AVOIDING, THE ISSUE, WITH ME, EVEN THOSE SHE WAS THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE, OR LAWYER. ZOHAR LEVY, WAS MIA, WHEN NEEDED, TO CLARIFY, THE SITUATION,WITH THOSE WORKING, UNDER THE DIRECTIVES, OF LESLEY NAGODA, TO GO AGAINST, THE ORDER OF THE COURT. ZOHAR LEVY, WENT ALONG WITH THEIR DECISION. SHE CONVENIENTLY FORGETS, AS A LAWYER, THAT SHE IS ALSO SUPPOSE TO NOT DO ANYTHING, THAT WOULD ALSO INTERFERE, IN THE ADMINISTRATION, OF JUSTICE. WHICH ALSO INCLUDED, ACTING WITH INTEGRITY, CONCERNING HER PROFESSION AND ALSO THE LAW.
LAWYER, ZOAR LEVY, WOULD ALSO BE PAID, REALLY WELL, TO AVOID ALL FORMS OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH ME, IN ORDER, TO CLARIFY THE ISSUE. SHE KEPT SILENT, WHILE THOSE OTHERS, WHO NEITHER KNEW THE LAW, AS WELL AS SHE DID, NOR HAD TAKEN ANY OATH, TO NOT INTERFERE, WITH IS ADMINISTRATION, CARRIED OUT THE UNLAWFUL EVICTION, THAT SHE MOST ASSUREDLY, ALSO KNEW ABOUT AND ALSO, AGREED WITH.
THROW OUT THE ETHICAL PRINCIPLES, AND MORAL DILEMA, BECAUSE SHE HAD NONE. AFTER INSTRUCTING HER SECRETARY, OR ASSISTANT, TO TELL ME, THAT SHE WAS IN A MEETING AND HER ASSISTANT CLAIMING, THAT SHE WOULD ALSO BE FREE TO TALK WITH ME, IN HALF AN HOUR, SHE NEVER DID. ZOHAR LEVY, NEVER CALLED ME BACK, THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE DAY, DESPITE MY MESSAGES TO HER, AS THE LAWYER, REPRESENTING HER CLIENT, SHIP, TO CONTACT THOSE WHO NEEDED CLARIFICATION, ON THE ISSUE, THE SUPERVISOR, AND TO LET HIM KNOW, THAT THE MATTER, WAS STILL BEFORE THE COURT, TO BE RESOLVED, BY THE COURT. SHE DID NO SUCH THING.
LAWYERS SHOULD NOT GO MISSING, OR TO AVOID MEETING, THE OTHER PARTY, TO A DISPUTE, WHO WAS ALSO RELYING, ON THE LAWYER, TO CLEAR UP, ANY LEGAL ISSUES, REGARDING THEIR CLIENT'S ACTIONS, AS A LAWYER. IF THERE WAS SOME LEGAL ISSUES, THAT HER CLIENTS, DID NOT UNDERSTAND, IT WAS THE LAWYER, ZOHAR LEVY'S LEGAL DUTY, TO EXPLAIN, THE LEGAL ISSUE, TO THEM, AND THAT WOULD ALSO, NOT GO AGAINST, THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. IN OTHER WORDS, SHE ALSO HAD A DUTY, TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND TO THE LAW. HER ACTIONS MUST ALSO NOT GO AGAINST THE LAW, OR AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.
WHAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE OUTCOME, IF THE LAWYER, ZOHAR LEVY, HAD ALSO CONTACTED, THE SUPERVISOR OF THE SHELTER, THAT WAS OPERATED BY SHIP, AND LET HIM KNOW, THAT THE MATTER WAS STILL BEFORE THE COURT, TO DECIDE ON THE ISSUES, BETWEEN SHIP AND THE TENANT AND THAT HE WAS NOT TO ACT IN ANY WAY THAT WOULD CAUSED THE COURT'S FUNCTION OR ROLE IN THE MATTER, TO BE DIMINISHED, BUT TO ALLOW THE LAWYER AND THE COURT TO FOLLOW THE COURT'S PROCESS. BUT SHE DID NOT DO THAT. SHE KEPT SILENT AND DID NOT CALL ANYONE,NOR DID SHE EVEN RETURNED MY TELEPHONE CALLS TO HER, TO CLARIFY THE SITUATION FOR HER CLIENT. I MET TORONTO LAWYER, ZOHAR LEVY, FOR THE FIRST TIME, ON APRIL 18,2024, WHEN SHE EMAILED ME, ABOUT BEING THE LAWYER, FOR HER CLIENT SHIP AND WANTED ME TO FILL HER IN, ON MY RECENT MOTION, THAT WAS FILED WITH THE COURT ON APRIL 15TH, TO TRANSFER MY CASE FILE, TO ANOTHER REGION. SHE WAS ALSO ASKING ME, ABOUT MY BLOG POST, ABOUT HER CLIENT, LESLEY NAGODA, THAT SEEMED TO HAVE, ALSO, RESONATED WITH HER NEGATIVELY. WOULD I TAKE THE POSTS DOWN, SHE HAD ASKED ME. I SAID NO. THAT THEY WERE WRITTEN, TO REPRESENT THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST, IN THE MATTER. THAT MY LOYALTY, WAS WITH THE PUBLIC AND NOT HER CLIENT. THE NEXT DAY, ONHER CLIENT'S DIRECTIVES, THEY STAGED AN UNLAWFUL EVICTION, WHILE THE MATTER WAS STILL BEFORE THE COURT, AND DURING WHICH TIME, THE LAWYER, ZOHAR LEVY, ALSO WENT MISSING IN ACTION (MIA) AND DID NOT RETURNED MY PHONE CALLS, AFTER HER ALLEGED MEETING, ACCORDING TO HER ASSISTANT. WHO CLAIMED THAT ZOHAR LEVY, WOULD BE CALLING ME BACK IN HALF AN HOUR, BUT WHICH SHE NEVER DID. THROUGHT THE DAY.
LAWYERS ACT, ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS, THIS IS THE NORM. SOME LAWYERS GO BEYOND THAT, TO INTERFERE, DELIBERTELY, WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. SOMETHING, THAT THEY ARE ALSO, EXPRESSLY, FORBIDDEN, TO DO SO, BY THE LAW SOCIETY. IN ZOHAR LEVY'S CASE, SHE ACTED CORRUPTLY, AND AIDED HER CLIENT, IN CAUSING AN EVICTION, OF THE TENANT, WHILE THE MATTER,WAS STILL BEFORE THE COURT AND THE COURT, HAD ALSO NOT YET HEARD, FROM BOTH PARTIES, TO THE DISPUTE. ZOHAR LEVEY'S ACTION, TO CONSPIRE WITH HER CLIENT, LESLEY NAGODA, THE DIRECTOR OF SHIP, TO CIRCUMVENT, THE COURT PROCEDURE, AND TO CAUSE A PREMATURE EVICTION OF THE TENANT, WAS WHAT SHE ALSO INTENED. SHE ACTED WITH A LACK OF INTEGRITY, BOTH PROFESSIONAL AND OTHERWISE.
SHE HAS ALSO EARNED HERSELF A COMPLAINT WITH THE LAW SOCIETY.
