U of O Watch mission, in the words of Foucault...

"One knows … that the university and in a general way, all teaching systems, which appear simply to disseminate knowledge, are made to maintain a certain social class in power; and to exclude the instruments of power of another social class. … It seems to me that the real political task in a society such as ours is to criticise the workings of institutions, which appear to be both neutral and independent; to criticise and attack them in such a manner that the political violence which has always exercised itself obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight against them." -- Foucault, debating Chomsky, 1971.

U of O Watch mission, in the words of Socrates...

"An education obtained with money is worse than no education at all." -- Socrates

video of president allan rock at work

Thursday, February 9, 2012

Telfer of U of O fame named in Fraud probe


CEO Ian Telfer gave $25 million to U of O under university president Gilles Patry's reign, hence the "Telfer School of Management". Related background link: HERE.

February 7, 2012 Toronto Star article:

The OSC (Ontario Securities Commission) will not investigate allegations of health and environmental harms, human rights violations and repression caused directly or indirectly by companies like Goldcorp and Hudbay. However, the OSC will investigate - in defense of the "public interest" - the sharing of insider information. What is supposedly of the "public interest" and of concern to law-makers and investors are not harms and violations caused by mining companies against other people, far away, but improperly sharing investor information.

Source: www.rightsaction.org

Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Rock administration ordered to follow the law: Must give access to President's emails

From A Student's-Eye View: HERE.

The Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) of Ontario has ruled on January 25, 2012 (IPC Order PO-3043) that the University of Ottawa has shown unacceptable disregard for the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act in refusing to respond to a University Senator's request for internal communications between President Allan Rock and his (former) Chief of Staff Stephane Emard-Chabot.

The University had flippantly and incorrectly rejected the access-to-information request by claiming that the request was not sufficiently clear. The IPC rebuffed the University and ordered it to perform the search for the emails and provide an access decision.

This illustrates the University's bold disrespect for Ontario's transparency law. The University of Ottawa receives among the highest numbers of IPC orders against it of all universities in Ontario.

Monday, January 30, 2012

Wow


I never thought I would see the day soon when the student media at the U of O would find its voice in the needed criticism of the university administration...

Wow.

The French student newspaper La Rotonde is on fire with being brushed aside by the Rock administration.

Its latest razor sharp editorial is HERE.
An English translation is provided by student senator Joseph Hickey HERE.

The editorial focuses on the internal administrative meltdown that is occurring with five major and sudden departures in the last 12 months or less:
  • chief of media relations Andre Dumulon,
  • main media mouthpiece,
  • chief of staff of the president,
  • VP-Academic (second in command) Francois Houle,
  • VP-Resources Victor Simon,
  • dean of science Andre E. Lalonde,

not to mention the departures since Rock's arrival on campus ... :
  • VP-Academic Robert Major,
  • Legal Counsel Michel Flaherty,
  • VP-Governance Pamela Harrod,
  • VP-Governance Nathalie Des Rosiers,
  • VP-External,
  • President Gilles Patry (in mid-career),
  • VP-Research Howard Alper,
  • Chair of the BOG Marc Jolicoeur, ...

Will The Fulcrum wake up and participate in this revolution in accountability?

PRESS RELEASE::: International MDs sue U of O for conspiracy to injure -- $120 million claim made public

(OTTAWA, January 30, 2012) – Dr. Waleed AlGhaithy (Neurosurgery Residency Program, University of Ottawa), Dr. Khalid Aba-Alkhail (Cardiac Surgery Residency Program) and Dr. Manal Al-Saigh (same) have filed a joint action against the University of Ottawa and several of its officials.

Discrimination, conspiracy to injure, malfeasance in public office, breaches of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, defamation, breach of contract, and negligence are claimed against the University and several of its officials.

Among the individual defendants are Dr. Jacques Bradwejn – Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Dr. James Worthington – Ottawa Hospital’s Vice-President of Medical Affairs and Patient Safety, Dr. Paul Bragg – Associate Dean Postgraduate Medical Education, Dr. Eric Poulin – Chair of the Department of Surgery, Dr. Therry Mesana – Chair of the Cardiac Surgery Division, Dr. Richard Moulton – Chair of the Neurosurgery Division, Dr. Fraser Rubens – Cardiac Surgery Program Director, and Dr. John Sinclair – former Neurosurgery Program Director.

The claim casts a spotlight on the state of medical training of foreign medical residents at both provincial and national levels in Canadian universities and illustrates some of the hurdles faced by foreign doctors at the U of O.

The plaintiffs’ case had garnered media attention in the Spring of 2011 when they held a press conference to announce that they had filed a Human Rights Complaint against the University of Ottawa.

They are represented by lawyers Douglas Christie and Barbara Kulaszka.

For more details please follow the link to the statement of claim: Aba-AlKhail et al. v. University of Ottawa et al. CV-11-440336.

- 30 -

For more information please contact:

Mireille Gervais, LL.L.
Director, Student Appeal Centre
Student Federation of the University of Ottawa
Email: case.cresac@sfuo.ca

Khalid Aba-AlKhail, MD
Cardiac Surgery Program
University of Ottawa


All related posts about this case and the Faculty of Medicine are HERE.

Sunday, January 29, 2012

St. Lewis v. Rancourt::: Inside view of court hearing on two motions


On October 7, 2011, two motions in the matter of Joanne St. Lewis v. Denis Rancourt were heard before The Honourable Mr. Justice McKinnon at the Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Ottawa, Elgin Street courthouse).

The plaintiff was represented by attorney Richard Dearden and his Gowlings team. The defendant was self-represented.

Given the open court principle in our society, the public is entitled to know exactly all that was said in court and the ruling of the judge.

This way, the public can judge the degree to which the courts and justice system behave fairly.

You can follow the October 7, 2011 in-court action via this accurate official transcript of the proceedings: PART-1, PART-2.

The rulings on the two motions are here: Motion-1, Motion-3.

Mr. Dearden stated in court that he intends to use the hearing transcript itself as evidence of malice against the defendant in the main defamation action. He also made it clear that he intended to get the defendant to pay costs: "you should not in any way be swayed by the submissions that he has been unemployed [...] but regardless, he's got a house and he's in litigation [...]"

This transcript gives a representation of the nature of the plaintiff's lawsuit being funded by the University of Ottawa, and of the Court's reaction to the litigation even in these procedural motions.


As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Canadian university presidents concerned about human rights choose their battles


At a time when Israel, backed by the US and Canada's power elite, is calling for all-out war to destroy Iran; even having a US Zionist pundit call-out in the media for US president Obama to be assassinated by Israel if he won’t attack Iran (Globe and Mail LINK)...

At a time when a major regional war is threatened to satisfy Israeli regime ambitions...

What better time for two university presidents, two champions of Canadian-government-sanctioned human rights advocacy, Allan Rock and Lloyd Axworthy, to point out (LINK, LINK) Iran's human rights violations against Iranian Baha'i educators who had their University of Ottawa degrees stripped from them by the Iranian government?

It is heartening to see these men of principle call out for the protection of human rights irrespective of the political circumstances.

In their own words: "Those who support human rights, who believe in access to education and who deplore repressive governments are increasingly speaking out ..."

Does this mean that we can soon expect our two academic champions of human rights to jointly and publicly denounce the lack of access to higher education for the occupied Palestinians of Gaza, mainly due to Israel bombing the schools, hospitals, and public health infrastructure...?

I hope so. But somehow I fear this will not occur soon.

[Note: This author does not minimize the human rights abuses of Iran or of any state, Canada included. But it seems to this author that influential citizens should be first concerned with the human rights abuses of their own nation and nation's allies, since that is where these concerned actors have the greatest potential influence and responsibility.]

Friday, January 27, 2012

EN FRANCAIS::: L'U d'O oppose le bilinguisme devant les tribunaux


Le professeur titulaire de physique Denis Rancourt a été limogé en 2009 sous prétexte d’avoir attribué des notes frauduleuses aux vingt-trois étudiant(e)s dans un cours de fin de cycle à l’Université d’Ottawa, dans une affaire majeure de liberté universitaire. Son syndicat le soutient dans un procès en cour. En plus l’université finance une poursuite judiciaire de $1 million contre lui pour diffamation, suite à sont traitement d'une professeure de droit d'avoir agit en “reine nègre” pour la position de cette professeure contre un rapport étudiant qui accusait l’institution de racisme systémique.

Récemment (les 24 et 26 janvier) le professeur Rancourt, qui est franco-Ontarien, a décidé de faire valoir ses droits de représentation en français à la fois au tribunal pour le travail et à la Cour supérieure de l’Ontario. Cela a causé des plaintes aigues des avocats unilingues anglophones retenus par l’université. Maitre Richard Dearden, en particulier, a indiqué à la cour qu’il chercherait à imposer des frais punitifs contre le professeur pour « abus de procédure » quand ce dernier devant un refus de la cour se mit simplement à adresser les intervenants en français lors d’une séance juridique, après avoir signalé les règles du Procureur général pour l’Ontario vis-à-vis du bilinguisme devant les tribunaux.

Le professeur de physique tient son blogue anglophone critiquant l’Université d’Ottawa « U of O Watch » depuis 2007. Dans le passé, l’université a menacé deux autres poursuites judiciaires contre le blogue.

"Bilingual" U of O hires English-only lawyers -- University Senator reports


When it comes to justice at the University of Ottawa, it appears that its lawyers speak only English:::

English-only Monolingualism of U of O Lawyers Delays Academic Freedom Cases (LINK)

In both cases, there was systematic balking and reprimand for the defendant to use his mother tongue of French.

In the labour arbitration case hearing on January 24, 2012, English-speaking lawyer Lynn Harnden complained profusely to the Tribunal against the defendant's (Rancourt's) demand to give evidence in French even though he had already confirmed that the University's main witness, former dean of science Andre E. Lalonde, would give his evidence in French.

In the St. Lewis v. Rancourt lawsuit case, on January 26, 2012, English-speaking lawyer Richard Dearden indicated to the Court that he would seek punitive (abuse of process) costs against the defendant (Rancourt) for demanding a bilingual proceeding. Intervening University hired lawyer Peter Doody informed the Court that he was not bilingual.

Examples of the institution's true language behaviour!?

Monday, January 16, 2012

Ibrahim Said wrongly dismissed - Medicine Dean Jacques Bradwejn biased against foreign doctor - Judge rules

(Jacques Bradwajn, Dean, Faculty of Medicine, U of O)

On December 30, 2011, a judge ruled (link HERE) in yet another case of wrongful bias and wrongful dismissal in "Canada's university's" (aka U of O) Faculty of Medicine. The national media reported on the ruling early this month:


This time the target was foreign-trained Dr. Ibrahim Said who was denied the certification to continue practicing medicine rather than being promoted to Associate Professor despite an excellent performance evaluation.

The judge is reported to have found that the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine, Dr. Jacques Bradwejn, acted with bias against Said. In my view, the circumstances were also not duly ascertained by the Faculty committee responsible to make the recommendation, which found it acceptable to go along with the Dean.

In recent years, at least five non-white doctors have been targeted by the Faculty of Medicine, with devastating career consequences. These are only the known cases that have led to court or tribunal processes.

The Rock administration has not yet seen fit to investigate or intervene but instead is in denial and funds extravagant legal defences against the plaintiffs or complainants. Not to mention the School of Nursing racial discrimination problems, HERE.

All U of O Watch links about the Faculty of Medicine are HERE.

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Dean of Health Sciences Denis Prud'homme stands up to Rock administration


In the present U of O climate of obedience a la political party discipline it is breaking news whenever any dean actually acts like a dean!

Here is the only example known to U of O Watch of a dean publicly opposing the Allan Rock administration.

Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences Dr. Denis Prud'homme is punishing Rock with media exposure for breaking a promise to nursing students to provide adequate space resources. Prud'homme has even compiled an extensive media list about the conflict on the Faculty's web page:



This provides accountability via public exposure.

The University is spending a lot of public money fighting its own students in courts and tribunals, fighting against access to information disclosures, suing a former professor, ..., including fighting to quash or minimize a Faculty of Health Science's Nursing students' Ontario Human Rights Tribunal complaint for racist discrimination (see below).

It also pays Allan Rock an unprecedented president's salary, in addition to his generous publicly funded MP's pension. (The pension itself is more than most full-time untenured teachers earn.)

It also spends unprecedented amounts for "media relations" and "academic programs marketing", including a two-for-one law degree scam with Israel (and here, here, here).

It also spends a far larger fraction of its budget for "administration" (not teaching or research or community service) than at any previous time in its institutional history.

It seems to this commentator that it could fund a proper 5-story building for the Faculty of Health Sciences. Is the Faculty too francophone? Too independent thinking? Too community oriented? What is the problem? And why break an explicit Allan Rock in-writing promise to Nursing students (HERE)?

After this is fixed (or before) maybe dean Prud'homme could get personally involved in examining how the Rock administration's legal team is treating the Nursing students' Ontario Human Rights Tribunal complaint for racist discrimination (HERE and HERE)...? And maybe look into the systemic racism in his faculty?

Thursday, January 12, 2012

In the news (EN FRANCAIS)::: Marie-Josée Berger in hot water?

(Note that the University of Moncton has its short-list candidates for president give public addresses to the university community as part of the selection process. What a concept! Maybe "Canada's university" could take a lesson in democracy here? Would Allan Rock have survived his past, HERE?)

.


capacadie.com (Moncton, NB)
le mercredi 11 janvier, 2012

DIEPPE - Alors que l’Université de Moncton a annoncé, ce mardi, les deux finalistes dans la course pour briguer le poste de recteur de l’établissement, la Fédération des étudiants et étudiantes de l’Université de Moncton (FÉÉCUM) s’inquiète d’une possible nomination de Marie-Josée Berger. Cette dernière a, en effet, été élue l’an passé doyenne la plus inefficace par la Fédération étudiante de l’Université d’Ottawa (FÉUO).

«À première vue, c’est inquiétant, mais il faut donner la chance à la candidate d’apporter sa version des faits», indique ainsi Ghislain LeBlanc, président de la FÉÉCUM.

Intimidation d’une élève lors d’une rencontre privée, menace envers une étudiante qui souhaitait changer de superviseur, non-respect du devoir de répondre aux plaintes des élèves contre certains professeurs... Les accusations portées à l’encontre de Marie-Josée Berger, doyenne de la Faculté d’éducation par le Centre de recours de l’Université d’Ottawa sont lourdes.

Pour toutes ces allégations, ce service proposé par la FÉUO afin d’offrir de l’aide aux étudiants qui désirent faire appel d’une décision administrative de l’université a donc décidé de nommer Mme Berger, Prix du bras de fer 2011.

Cette distinction a pour but de dénoncer l’administrateur de l’université qui a le plus attiré l’attention des agents de recours étudiant par son attitude impitoyable ou injuste et par son manque de respect.

«Je suis en poste depuis 2007 et j’ai donc eu la possibilité d’observer la manière dont la faculté a été gérée par Marie-Josée Berger. Lorsque nous avons créé le prix, il n’y a pas eu d’hésitation. Marie-José Berger a été élue l’Administrateur qui a eu le comportement le plus inacceptable», critique Mireille Gervais, directrice du centre.

De plus, la doyenne de la Faculté d’éducation aurait quelques soucis relationnels avec certains professeurs du département.

«Lorsque l’on a désigné Mme Berger pour ce prix, un membre d’une association de professeurs est venu nous féliciter», explique, ainsi, Mireille Gervais.

Cette dernière nous a également fait parvenir les résultats d’une étude interne établie par l’Université d’Ottawa en 2007. Cette enquête, conduite auprès du personnel de l’établissement, révélait que les professeurs de la Faculté d’éducation étaient parmi les plus mécontents (seconde position) par la gestion de leur département.

De même, plus de la moitié d’entre eux, parmi ceux qui avaient répondu à l’enquête, ne se sentaient pas traités avec respect.

Malgré tout, il convient de relativiser la portée de cette étude dans la mesure où moins de 12 professeurs sur les 75 que compte le corps professoral de la faculté avaient répondu au questionnaire.

De même, il faut prendre avec précaution les plaintes reçues par le bureau du Centre de recours puisqu’aucune n’a été suivie d’effet.

«Les étudiants ont eu peur des représailles», a néanmoins justifié Mireille Gervais.

L’Acadie Nouvelle aurait souhaité parler de toute cette affaire avec Mme Berger, mais cette dernière, en déplacement professionnel, n’a pu nous répondre. Elle aura tout le loisir de s’expliquer lors des consultations publiques auprès de la communauté universitaire de Moncton, qui auront lieu dans les prochaines semaines.

All U of O Watch posts about Marie-Josée Berger: HERE.
.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Remember this? UofOWatch time machine to 2007


Ottawa Citizen report, October 9, 2007

"But the study also flags the stress of mounting workloads and tensions between professors and deans. Those conflicts appear sharpest in the faculties of education and medicine, which consistently reported the highest levels of dissatisfaction."


The faculties of medicine and education have also been those most flagged at UofOWatch.

U of O in the news::: Houle, Berger

The VP-Academic represented institutional memory under the Rock outside administration. The move is sudden and rather quiet (no press release, no party). Who will Rock name to replace Houle?


  • Dean of Education Marie-Josee Berger is on the short-list of two to be the next president of the University of Moncton (New Brunswick):

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Clickers for teaching, nothing for learning


Senator Joseph Hickey has exposed another administrative scam at the University of Ottawa (LINK).

The admin wants to tailor classroom practice towards more mindless technology that prevents or substitutes human interactions with technological gadgetry. And of course they want to media market the fact that they are doing this, as though it were a good thing.

The best way to manage the behaviours of professors is to offer research money and gold stars of funding for their annual reports...

Meanwhile the disease of PowerPoint has spread to epidemic proportions:


without any hope in sight.

Societal engineering of the sterile classroom...

Monday, December 19, 2011

GSAED out to get a student University Senate member for ... ?


"WTF" seems like the natural response to this craziness:

GSAED Councillors Wish to Discipline Student Senator over Pay Equity Request (link)

How a disgruntled physics student could get this far against another physics student using the graduate student union is, well, difficult to understand. Are the GSAED Council members eager to participate in mindless mobbing and why?

We might conclude that the brilliant administration of the university has inspired high quality student governance. Oiyoiyoi.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Remember this? UofOWatch time machine to 1997


It is difficult to know what is most surprising about this 1997 story: That the Fulcrum would write a biting story critical of the administration or that a judge would side with a student against the university...? The legal decision is HERE.

The University of Ottawa was found to disregard a student complaint and to aide a School of Management professor (Jimming Lin) in stealing a student's (Paul Boudreau) intellectual property. Really nice stuff.

This is stunning in view of the University's stated and demonstrated dedication to protect its intellectual property in certain other circumstances... HERE, HERE, HERE and THIS video!

It would be interesting to know if the notorious professor Lin was ever disciplined for his academic fraud? After all, the author of the instant blog was suspended without pay by the University of Ottawa for the picture of Tabaret Hall that you see here on the front page (VIDEO).

I bet not. (Just a wild guess.)

Monday, December 12, 2011

St. Lewis v. Rancourt::: Motion follows mediation attempt


This is an update in the matter of the $1 million defamation lawsuit of plaintiff law professor Joanne St. Lewis, funded by the University of Ottawa, against defendant former physics professor Denis Rancourt.

The parties attempted mediation on December 6, 2011. The mediation attempt lasted almost three hours. The mediator was Deidre Powell (link). The mediation resulted from the defendant's Offer to Settle (link).

The plaintiff is a lawyer and was accompanied at mediation by four more lawyers from the Gowlings law firm:
  • Richard Dearden
  • Wendy Wagner
  • Ryan Kennedy
  • Anastasia Semenova
The plaintiff did not allow the defendant (who is self-represented) to bring an accompanying person.

The parties did not settle any issues in the case.

Immediately after leaving the mediation a Gowlings lawyer served the defendant with a new motion. The new motion is for case management leading to a plaintiff's motion for Summary Judgement.

The case management motion is scheduled to be heard on January 26, 2012 (which may change). The Summary Judgement hearing would be arranged following a schedule that is to be determined.

As a rough definition: A Summary Judgement is a kind of "trial on paper" where the evidence is presented in documentary form and only legal arguments from counsels are heard at the public court hearing.

***

As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Saturday, December 10, 2011

"Joanne St. Lewis Threatens to Sue Student Senator over Blog" -- Student's-Eye View


As a recent development in the St. Lewis v. Rancourt matter, University of Ottawa student university-senate member Joseph Hickey reports "Joanne St. Lewis Threatens to Sue Student Senator over Blog" and has posted an email exchange with counsel for St. Lewis Richard Dearden, initiated by a Notice of Libel sent to Hickey, on the blog "Student-s-Eye View":

Joanne St. Lewis Threatens to Sue Student Senator over Blog


As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Monday, December 5, 2011

U of O's latest stunt in the wrongful dismissal case of Denis Rancourt

"We can't follow the Adjudicator's Order because it's in English"
-- University of Ottawa, "Canada's largest bilingual university"

When it comes to dealing with their wrongly fired physics professor Denis Rancourt, the University of Ottawa Allan Rock administration's disposition for legalistic stunts is unbounded.

For example, in the on-going wrongful dismissal tribunal hearings, the university administration has embarrassingly instructed its hired lawyers from the prestigious Ottawa law firm Emond-Harnden:

  1. to argue that the professor's "post-dismissal behaviour" (read U of O Watch blog) should be allowed as (future) evidence to justify the (past) dismissal, in a sad display of "see, we told you we were right to have fired him, see, see..." (LINK-with-video)
  2. to argue that there are reasons that Rancourt's U of O Watch blog needs to be silenced during the tribunal hearings but that these reasons should not be disclosed to the public in the public tribunal... (LINK-with-video)
  3. to argue that Rancourt's pre-dismissal suggestion to a student to invite the rapper Immortal Technique onto campus was an incitement to violence (yes) now requiring a special investigation (even though the rapper suggestion, with copied lyrics, was sent to the entire senior university administration without causing so much as a ripple at the time)... (LINK)
  4. to argue that the pedagogical developments used by Rancourt were "experiments on human subjects" and that therefore it now (in mid-tribunal hearings) needed to be researched if a research ethics committee approval had been obtained and whether this constituted an additional cause for discipline... (LINK)

It could almost be called the "Emond-Harnden zoo of legal stunts, sponsored by the Allan Rock administration" and here is the latest instalment...

On the one hand, Lynn Harnden solemnly stated to the labour Arbitrator that the University is seriously (in the "zoo" sense?) committed to providing disclosure of "all arguably relevant documents" (on the same day that obviously incomplete and superficial "disclosures" were handed over - LINK), while on the other hand the same law firm has been hired by the University to now additionally generate stunts to block Rancourt's access to information (ATI) requests for his own personal information in the matter, in appeals with Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) Adjudicators.

And here is the latest of these:

  • IPC orders (IPC Order PO-2009-F) University to search, obtain, and hand over documents to Rancourt from all its professors...
  • Emond-Harnden's Steven Williams argues to IPC that it ("Canada's largest 'bilingual' university") cannot because the Order is in English...
  • IPC Adjudicator responds to the University to get itself a translation if it needs one and gives it an extra month to accomplish this difficult task... (see Adjudicator's letter to the University HERE).

The IPC Adjudicator seems, understandably, exasperated (link). Layers and layers of unboolivable... A world where legal stunts are the norm, in the service of a university administration, "Canada's university"!


Relevant media commentary by Rancourt about ATI and university professors:



All posts about the wrongful dismissal hearings: HERE.

See hearings schedule and reports: HERE.

Chronology of wrongful-dismissal background events: HERE.
.

Friday, December 2, 2011

"Suit with racial tones to mediation" -- The Lawyers Weekly


Latest media report in the Joanne St. Lewis v. Denis Rancourt defamation lawsuit:

Christopher Guly, "Suit with racial tones to mediation", The Lawyers Weekly, 2 December 2011. (Alt-Link-page-1, Alt-Link-page-2)



As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

U of O senate member launches discussion forum website about the St. Lewis v. Rancourt lawsuit


University of Ottawa Senate member Joseph Hickey has started the new website:

"Forum for dicussion and debate on the lawsuit, University of Ottawa -- Joanne St. Lewis vs. Denis Rancourt"

The instant U of O Watch post gives the relevant link for information, in following all substantive developments in the lawsuit. It does not imply endorsement or agreement.


As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Wednesday, November 23, 2011

"Author Jeff Schmidt apologizes to Professor Joanne St. Lewis" -- U of O student senator reports

Following his PREVIOUS REPORT, University of Ottawa student senator Joseph Hickey has reported a latest development related to the St. Lewis v. Rancourt defamation lawsuit (link):



Note: U of O Watch reports all prima facie significant developments in the on-going St. Lewis v. Rancourt lawsuit, from all sources, and posts all identified and non-trivial comments relevant to the given post. Such reports do not imply agreement with or endorsement of the linked items.


As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Monday, November 21, 2011

St. Lewis v. Rancourt defamtion lawsuit slated for court-imposed mediation

Mediator -- Deidre S. Powell

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice imposes Mandatory Mediation within six months of filing a first defence.

An earlier post explained some of the circumstances that led to scheduling a mediation attempt: HERE.

Shortly after the pleadings were closed (see chronology HERE), plaintiff St. Lewis filed a motion to block all discovery of documents, force immediate Mandatory Mediation and impose her choice of mediator. This additionally led to three secondary motions filed by the plaintiff.

As the six-month court deadline approached defendant Rancourt sent the plaintiff an offer to settle the first motion. The offer was accepted. An expected December mediation was reported in the media (here). Barring unforeseen changes:

The mediation will be held on December 6, 2011.

The mutually agreed mediator will be:



As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

"Author Jeff Schmidt campaigns for just treatment of Professor Joanne St. Lewis" -- Student senator reports

University of Ottawa student senator Joseph Hickey has reported this development related to the St. Lewis v. Rancourt defamation lawsuit:

Author Jeff Schmidt campaigns for just treatment of Professor Joanne St. Lewis


As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Friday, November 18, 2011

Woaaa. U of O president Allan Rock frantically waves off student at university senate -- video

The closing moments of the University Senate meeting of November 7, 2011, provided a frantic outburst by embattled arm-waving and finger-pointing senate-chair and president Allan Rock who refused to be transparent when asked to disclose the guest list at a "university function" that he hosted at his home while skipping out of his statutory senate responsibilities.

The University of Ottawa is a public university in Canada's capital.

Rock compares himself to student senator and administration-critic Joseph Hickey, based on his recollections of his 1970s days in student governance at the institution, but draws the important distinction that Mr. Hickey's queries are not "relevant" to senate or to student interests; "relevance" of course being defined by his administration.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Transparency and academic freedom co-degraded at U of O -- IPC Order sets bad precedent

A recent (November 7, 2011) Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner (IPC) rulings on an access request at the University of Ottawa fails on transparency and misuses academic freedom.

.

Saturday, November 12, 2011

Dr. Steven E. Noble reporting on the Rancourt wrongful dismissal hearings -- November 1st hearing


Critical pedagogue Dr. Steven E. Noble has been reporting on the binding arbitration tribunal hearings into the wrongful dismissal case of Denis Rancourt. His reports are HERE.

Concluding highlights of Dr. Noble's report about the most recent November 1, 2011, hearing day are as follows.

The points raised by the University group were unbelievable and showed how completely unarmed this side is. The first point regarding Dr. Rancourt somehow engaging in ‘radical’ or ‘experimental’ pedagogy (remember, according to the university the hearing is not about pedagogy!) and therefore comes under the purview of the University Ethics Review Process is completely and utterly absurd. Further, it shows that the University group are not even in the realm of being academics. I come from within Faculties of Education (University of BC and University of Ottawa) – and those faculties have at their core exploring and experimenting with pedagogical approaches and never, over my 15 years of teaching have I ever had to submit an ethics review form along with my syllabus or daily lessons…. With over 100 professors and instructors in the U of O Faculty of Education imagine the amount of ethics review processing that would have to go on every term?! Ignorant, ignorant, ignorant. And it’s not just the Faculty of Education – I know other faculties are, heaven forbid, experimenting and playing with pedagogical approaches and I am 99% sure none of them are submitting ethics review forms either! And further, the University side has had two and a half years to consider that Dr. Rancourt was introducing innovative teaching in an experimental or exploratory way – as he had done years prior to his dismissal. Further, the University characterizes the pedagogy of grading all students similarly as something approaching academic fraud. Really? Faculties of Education and others have been (the University of BC does this routinely) invoking “pass/fail” courses for year whereby if student complete work satisfactorily, they receive a pass and if not they receive a fail. I know at UBC the grade equivalent to a “pass” is B+ so everyone receiving above that level of work passes. How is this different from everyone completing A level work receiving an A? Also, critical pedagogy, which is the approach Dr. Rancourt was exploring has been around since Paulo Freire, in Brazil, created this approach – that’s almost 50 years ago! The K-12 system has dabbled with it for decades; community groups work with it and colleges/universities have explored it for decades… but all of a sudden because Dr. Rancourt is experimenting with it in physics that it must be something novel and new…. Please.

My experience, thus far, of the University side is that it is so focussed on Dr. Rancourt and the narrow context of what he was doing that it is not checking what the broader academic landscape is and the hypocrisy it regularly commits; so, to me, they come off as a complete ignoramuses and buffoons. On top of this, the University side continually highlights how retrograde the institution is without realizing it.

... Through the three days of preliminary motions I have been completed unimpressed by the University side. Highly reactionary , whiny, emotional, petulant – I’m still waiting to hear some serious facts. We didn’t hear a whole lot from the APUO today because much of it was the University and its continued stalling. The APUO is raring to go so they’re spinning their wheels as the University side continues its amateur hour. I’m left wondering how much in tax payer dollars and tuition money is being spent on all of this? How many profs could be hired, how many library books and journal subscriptions and software programs could be bought, how many bursaries could be awarded with all this money?

We, now have to await until January 23, 2012 for – hopefully – the main hearing to start – barring any further caterwauling, stalling, temper tantrums from the University.

All posts about the wrongful dismissal hearings: HERE.

See hearings schedule and reports: HERE.

Chronology of wrongful-dismissal background events: HERE.
.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

St. Lewis v. Rancourt defamation lawsuit::: Ottawa Black Law Students’ Association Public Statement



We, the Black Law Students’ Association of the University of Ottawa (BLSA Ottawa), are a network of students devoted to excellence and substantive equality. We belong to a national student federation, the Black Law Students’ Association of Canada (BLSAC), committed to advancing the academic and professional interests of black law students across the country. We are charged with the responsibility of actively creating an environment in which black law students, our colleagues, friends and mentors are supported when subject to oppressive and racially discriminatory conduct.

Consequently, we take this opportunity to address publicly the statements made by Denis Rancourt, a former physics professor at the University of Ottawa, who, on his blog U of O Watch, wrote that Faculty of Law Professor Joanne St. Lewis acted like a “house negro” in response to her assessment of a report done by the Student Appeal Centre (SAC) in 2008 at the University of Ottawa.

Historically, “house negro” was a term used to denote a black slave in the United States and Canada who worked within the home of a slave master and who severed ties with his or her cultural-racial heritage. It was a term used to describe a black person who supported the continued marginalization and enslavement of black people. In the opening lines of his blog post Rancourt writes, “February is Black History Month in Canada and the US. U of O Watch believes that it is the right time not only to honour Black Americans who fought for social justice against masters but also to out Black Americans who were and continue to be house negroes to masters.” Not only does U of O Watch not acknowledge African Canadian identities, it claims to “out” black Americans who are still “house negro” to masters. Black Canadians have a distinctive and complex history that is different to that of the United States. We are not “house negroes” because we actively fight for and continue to rigorously advocate for equality and the advancement of black people.

The SAC Report entitled, “Mistreatment of Students, Unfair Practices and Systemic Racism at the University of Ottawa” documented a finding of systemic racism using undefined data and an unrepresentative sampling of the population. In her assessment Professor St. Lewis stated, “the fact that the report did not succeed in its methodological attempts does not mean that there is not a problem that should be addressed.” She further stated, “when the pool of subjects to be examined is so small it is critically important that the data is evaluated cautiously and evaluated carefully…this does not appear to have been the case here.”

Professor St. Lewis has never stated that there is no racism at the University of Ottawa. The very first recommendation in her evaluation report calls for an independent assessment to determine whether systemic racism plays any part in the Academic Fraud process. As we understand it, her point is that the SAC Report is methodologically flawed and misses the opportunity to meaningfully address structural racial discrimination at the university. As Professor St. Lewis asked in her first recommendation, we support the call for an independent assessment of the academic fraud process to “determine whether systematic racism plays any part in the Academic Fraud process” and an account of what actions SAC has taken since its report was released.

We, BLSA Ottawa, know racism to be a multi-dimensional and nuanced subject area. We firmly plant our roots in anti-racist politics. However, this does not mean that a report that is wanting of substance is to be endorsed because we are people of colour. Students would benefit from an in-depth investigative process to lend credibility to any claim of systemic racism. To declare that the only black female English Common Law professor acted like a “house negro” for merely pointing this out is reprehensible; and we condemn it in the strongest possible terms. Professor St. Lewis has been the strongest and longest-standing mentor available to black law students from Vancouver to Halifax, including here in the National Capital (Region) for over 20 years.

The United Nations declared 2011 to be the International Year for People of African Descent. We, BLSA Ottawa, stand in full solidarity with Professor Joanne St. Lewis, and call on all law students, lawyers and community members to stand united with the black community in our collective effort to oppose all instances of racial discrimination.

UofOWatch: Since the original post does not allow comments, please feel free to comment here.


As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Irregular U of O selection of Michaelle Jean as Chancellor -- Student Senator report



Will the new Chancellor-to-be intervene as requested?


Related post on Michaelle Jean about systemic racism at U of O: HERE.

Tuesday, November 8, 2011

Canada's university presidents discover a new variety of academic freedom


Well there you have it.

The geniuses that administer our public universities have decided to re-define academic freedom without reference to the last hundred years of jurisprudence and academic workplace practice.

Why not. What the hell. Let's just make it up.

They have done this via their association -- the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC). Whereas their last (1988) statement on academic freedom was palatable and consistent with reality, the new and improved version launched in 2011 is a manifesto to eliminate the concept altogether.

It is a an excretion of administratium aimed at arming executives against their critics and all those students and professors who may wish to entertain notions of collegial governance, professional independence, and intra-institutional critique.

The Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) has rightly seen fit to condemn the new AUCC policy document in an open letter, thanks to an institutional memory that goes beyond the last few years.

It's all very telling.

This means at least two things:
(1) Our "leaders" loathe academics who cherish critical scholarship and fear communities of independent thinkers; and

(2) Our "leaders" correctly judge that they can pollute the policy environment with such rubbish without risking ridicule and significant backlash, showing that academic freedom truly has been eroded.

Sad, sad, sad.

Integrating Empire relies on us being brain-dead and the educational system is the best way to achieve intellectual mindocide (ref). The presidents are just doing their job. And they will continue to do their job as long as we continue to sleep through it all.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Rancourt wrongful dismissal hearings::: Full disclosure is required

(see video commentary below)

In the matter of the on-going binding arbitration tribunal into the wrongful dismissal case of physics professor Denis Rancourt, the University of Ottawa has made a legal undertaking to disclose everything that is "arguably relevant" to all the issues before the arbitrator.

The union (APUO) has established in the tribunal that the issues include that the firing was made in bad faith, under a false pretext, with the goal of silencing and removing Rancourt.

In the words of renowned academic workplace researcher Professor Kenneth Westhues, the Rancourt firing was an "administrative mobbing."

The University provided its disclosures six months after the May 2, 2011, start of the hearings.

These University disclosures were reported by the union to the tribunal on November 1, 2011, as being "superficial" and "incomplete", in what can only be characterized as an understatement.

Hired-lawyer Lynn Harnden for the University on November 1, 2011, undertook to "verify" the completeness of the University's disclosures, which contain virtually no documents about any of the particulars of bad faith which the union has submitted.

The latter union-advanced particulars include:
  • The University's 2006-2008 covert information-gathering campaign against Rancourt and other University employees and students
  • The University's 2007 unjustified barring of Rancourt from all first-year-level courses
  • The University's 2008 unjustified barring of Rancourt from all teaching
  • The University's November-2008 lock-out of Rancourt and all his graduate students from their laboratory and the removal of essential laboratory materials
  • The University's December-2008 banning of Rancourt from campus except with police escort, including his campus radio show and his cinema discussion series
  • The University's 2009 refusals to consider duly submitted documents in its decision to fire Rancourt

Such apparent disregard of an undertaking to disclose, if not corrected, is an egregious breach of natural justice. For the arbitration to be allowed to proceed under these conditions, if not substantively corrected, would be a fatal flaw in the tribunal process.

Here is professor Rancourt's reaction in a video interview made on November 1, 2011:



Message to U of O:
Full disclosure is required


All posts about the wrongful dismissal hearings: HERE.

See hearings schedule and reports: HERE.

Chronology of wrongful-dismissal background events: HERE.
.

Rancourt wrongful dismissal hearings::: Invitation to students to engage with institutions

"It seems to me that the real political task in a society such as ours is to criticise the workings of institutions, which appear to be both neutral and independent; to criticise and attack them in such a manner that the political violence which has always exercised itself obscurely through them will be unmasked, so that one can fight against them."
-- Michel Foucault, debating Chomsky, 1971.

In this video, fired physics professor Denis Rancourt invites students do consider Foucault's position and to positively engage with the powerful institutions that constrain education and their lives:



All posts about the wrongful dismissal hearings: HERE.

See hearings schedule and reports: HERE.

Chronology of wrongful-dismissal background events: HERE.
.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Rancourt wrongful dismissal hearings::: Student media intimidates and harasses University representatives -- video

Youtube video shows misbehaviour of student video reporter which was disallowed by the Arbitrator who found it to be harassment and intimidation:



These events occurred on October 31, 2011, and November 1, 2011, at hearings into the wrongful dismissal of tenured physics professor Denis Rancourt at the University of Ottawa. The next hearing date is January 23, 2012.


All posts about the wrongful dismissal hearings: HERE.

See hearings schedule and reports: HERE.

Chronology of wrongful-dismissal background events: HERE.
.

Do democracy and a Rock mix?

It would seem not.

Allan Rock Admin Wants Unspecified Closed Session: Nov. 7 Senate Meeting

But there is always hope:
Senate Will Correct SFUO Election Scam
.

Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Student union slaps hard to get president Allan Rock to follow his own policies

University Senate camera must stay on.

SFUO Stands Up for Senate Video Transparency: Letter to President Rock

Letter is HERE.

FAIR examples of academia in trouble in our troubled times



York University fires whistleblower

York University has fired one of its key investigators who turned into a whistleblower of possible fraud at the school that eventually led to a police investigation.


Code of Silence: legal threats silence Canadians

In 2008, Les Éditions Écosociété, a tiny Montreal publishing house, released a 348-page treatise on human rights and environmental violations by Canadian mining companies overseas.

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

DAY-4 hearing into wrongful dismissal of Rancourt::: You could not make this up...


In another zoo-like episode, University hired lawyer Lynn Harnden came in this morning and announced to the Arbitrator, to the union and to the public that the University of Ottawa has just come to the realization that fired physics professor Denis Rancourt's innovative pedagogical advances constitute experimentation on human subjects.

And that, therefore, obviously, this opens a whole area that the University needs to research. Were the necessary experimental protocols approved? Was the ethics committee for experimentation on human subjects consulted?

This was introduced as new grounds for the dismissal of Rancourt and the hearing needed to be adjourned to give the University time to research these newly discovered violations...

Union lawyer Sean McGee responded that the idea that professor Rancourt's innovative teaching should be compared to testing an unknown vaccine "defies belief".

Harnden then dropped this but presented another reason that the hearing needed to be adjourned:

Despite the University having all the relevant Rancourt emails and blog posts for years and despite the University being in possession of Rancourt's office computer since the 2009 firing, the University now proclaimed that its own opening statements of yesterday newly established that the Rancourt office computer hard-drive now needed to be searched...

It argued a search of this computer was needed before the hearing could be continued.

The Arbitrator accepted the latter argument but insisted that the University must be ready to roll by the next hearing day (January 23, 2012). In looking at Mr. Harnden the Arbitrator explained "you will both have your spin but the evidence is the evidence..." Mr. Harnden smiled in agreement.

Then McGee made a final point: The University disclosure of documents (provided only yesterday) appears incomplete.

Harnden undertook to verify the completeness of the University disclosure and to advise accordingly at some later time.

As a last point, Harnden tried to get the Arbitrator to "clarify" his order to exclude video cameras to also exclude cameras outside of the hearing room. The Arbitrator explained his ruling that inside was inside and outside was outside. Mr. Harnden seemed satisfied with that.

The whole thing took under one hour and another day of hearings was again thus wasted. The count so far is: One of four days of hearings has been properly used as intended when first scheduled.

All posts about the wrongful dismissal hearings: HERE.

See hearings schedule and reports: HERE.

Chronology of wrongful-dismissal background events: HERE.
.

Monday, October 31, 2011

U of O witch-hunt against Rancourt in full swing -- DAY-3 of arbitration trial


Today was DAY-3 of the binding labour arbitration hearing into the wrongful dismissal case of physics professor Denis Rancourt. Following a rough start (link to all posts about hearings), it was up to the University, in the person of union-busting lawyer Lynn Harnden, to make the opening statements.

The opening statement did not disappoint. It was over-the-top with partial and undated extracts from blog posts, media articles, emails from unidentified sources; including lyrics from Immortal Technique, a reference to the Ottawa bank firebombing, allegations of inciting violence (evidenced by not inciting violence), and more.

Harnden distributed paper copies of his 19-page statement to the media and public: HERE.

The public and the union were stunned, as was the grievor.

The union, in the person of labour lawyer Sean McGee, patiently responded orally in an almost two-hour presentation. Here are highlights:

"His ideas are so dangerous that he is not allowed on campus without a police escort."

"Can a professor challenge the established order and entrenched patterns of thought? Can a professor adopt a methodology in his teaching and defend and protect that methodology ... without fear of the capital punishment of termination?"

"The University is offended, inconvenienced, and students criticize ... his methods are unpopular and unconventional ... but what is this case about?"

"The University's portrait of a Mansonesque figure is such a distortion of the facts."

"The allegation of 'frivolous grading' is just not true. Nothing of the sort. This was a studied, carefully considered attempt to improve the way physics is taught and learned."

"Calling this 'academic fraud' is shocking hyperbole from an institution of higher learning. The University alleges 'frivolous', 'fraudulent', 'selfish' ... there is nothing to suggest selfish. In fact, quite the contrary ..."

"Case in point, the use of Immortal Technique to show how demonic professor Rancourt is and to allege his desperation in his desire to lure students ... is reminiscent of Catholic nuns in Ottawa urging young girls to stay away from Elvis Presley's concert and his lewd and gyrating hips... and this now in the 21st century."

"Professor Rancourt was made to be increasingly limited to a smaller and smaller sphere of activity: from no teaching in 1st year, to no teaching, to being locked out of his laboratory, to blocking his cinema series, to blocking access to his campus radio show, to no campus access without police escort, to termination."

"This is significant evidence that the University wanted to cut off his efforts to communicate his ideas."

"We are going to ask you to conclude that professor Rancourt does not incite people to violence -- does not, has not, and will not incite anyone to violence. For the University to cite the law about risks of violent acts -- raising that in this context - is - difficult - to - understand - ..."

"The University is funding the defamation lawsuit [St. Lewis v. Rancourt] it now uses as evidence for professor Rancourt's dismissal..."

"In the end, this is a bad faith attempt to get rid of him at all costs."

"Regardless of what you think of professor Rancourt, we will ask you to find that there were no grounds for dismissal."

Tomorrow is DAY-4. The University wants a discovery order to dig into the Immortal Technique connection... Meanwhile, it has supplied none of the emails of the upper administration's known "war room" meetings in firing Rancourt.

Following public submissions (LINK), the Arbitrator had released his decision to ban all video and audio recordings of the hearings, which are done without an official court transcript -- see ruling HERE. The University's on-record repeated attempts (E.G.) to block the grievor's UofOWatch blog during the hearings fell flat and was not mentioned or retained in the Arbitrator's decision.

See hearings schedule and reports: HERE.

Chronology of wrongful-dismissal background events: HERE.
.

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Wires crossed in the U of O St. Lewis v. Rancourt litigation...?


"... it is a personal libel action and has nothing to do with it being a SLAPP suit at all."

-- Richard G. Dearden, Gowlings-firm-lawyer paid by U of O (link)


"Her efforts were not personal, but in the interests of the University."

-- David W. Scott, BLG-national-Co-Chair lawyer paid by the U of O (link)




"I have been asked ... to provide an independent evaluation..."

-- Joanne St. Lewis, U of O law professor and plaintiff (link)


"The University has received and will make public this week an evaluation, by an independent assessor, of the report of the Student Appeals Centre."

-- Robert Major, Former U of O VP-Academic and Provost (link)


"... work which she undertook at the request of the University and in the course of her duties and responsibilities as an employee. Her efforts were not personal, but in the interests of the University."

-- David W. Scott, BLG-national-Co-Chair lawyer paid by the U of O (link)
?

Oh, and this by the incomparable president Allan Rock (link):

From: Allan Rock
Sent: Monday November 17, 2008 11:25 AM
To: Robert Major, Victor Simon, Mona Nemer, Nathalie Des Rosiers, Andre Dumulon, Julie Cafley
Subjet: RE: NEWS RELEASE -- Student Appeal Centre report

Robert:

I think the report is very well done. My only concern is with the first recommendation, the wording of which seems to assume that there is some racism present already. Since Professor St. Lewis has already concluded that there is no evidence of it, such wording is wrong and inconsistent with her own report.

Apart from that, the report looks very sound. I assume any press release will say that we are going to study the recommendations, since we have to consult the Senate and other interested parties before committing to the time limits and other recommended changes.

One last point. I would like Robert to be the only point of contact for us with Professor St. Lewis. Although her report is excellent, it may be criticized as not being "independent" from the administration. So far, our dealings with her have been through Robert and have been scrupulously objective. We have simply sought her view, and have imposed no limitations, contraints or conditions. She has been entirely free to say anything she wants. In order to maintain this professional and objective relationship with her, I want Robert to be the only one in communication with her. Robert can simply observe that the first recommendation seems inconsitent with her findings. It will then be up to professor St. Lewis to decide whether to make a change. If a number of people all send emails and call, we will lose that focus of professionalism and independence.

I will take this matter up with CA at noon today. Robert, will you be able to plug in by phone?

Allan
[In response to Robert asking all to quickly give him their feedback on St. Lewis' draft report...]

As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.

Saturday, October 29, 2011

Gowlings-firm-lawyer Richard Dearden reaction to U of O disclosing its funding of St. Lewis lawsuit


Following THIS, as per a recent media article (HERE):

“I would think that the defamatory statements that he has made about Professor St. Lewis show that it is a personal libel action and has nothing to do with it being a SLAPP suit at all,” Dearden said.

“It has everything to do with protecting your reputation.”

Dearden, who often acts for The Citizen, said the blog comes up as the second result in a Google search of St. Lewis’s name.

“It has to come down. That’s our position,” Dearden said, adding that financial arrangements with his client are privileged and he would not discuss them.

***


As background, all related posts about the lawsuit are HERE.

Links to all pleadings and court documents in the lawsuit are HERE.

A Law Times media article about the lawsuit is HERE.
.