Ask a Canada Law Question, Get an Answer ASAP!
for DEBRA THAL
1. Last year an Order was made for me to provide an "updated psychiatrist report", based on the opinion of a psychiatrist 3 years prior
2. months ago, I submitted a NOM to have the wording of a previous order clarified. the order in question is the one that pertained to "an updated psychiatrist report". 3. I challenged the order as it was written, because there was no "original report" to "update" if you recall that issue. if you recall our earlier discussions, The original psychiatrist gave an informal opinion, not an official report. 4. I have to go through my files from months ago, but if I recall correctly, the judge simply challenged joanna's previous lawyer with the same question and advised that the MHA that i had already provided was the best to go by anyway. the kicker is, I don't think the original order was actually changed the way I asked it to be. The lawyer did agree to accept the MHA, and the judge then ORDERED an update of THAT MHA. 5. The other side is attempting to bring up the ORDER regarding getting an "updated psyCHIATRIST REPORT". QUESTION: How can I present the strongest argument that the Order was in effect CHANGED?? (it wasn't officially, but the other lawyer for my wife agreed to accept the MHA I provided and the MHA-Update that I later provided.)