Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Freemen on the land are growing exponentially

troutman · 09-26-2013, 10:20 AM

What's New

OPCA Litigants – The Phenomenon of Freemen on the Land

http://www.lawsociety.ab.ca/publicat..._the_Land.aspx

In Advisory articles in 2003 and 2009, the Law Society of Alberta cautioned lawyers not to engage in notarizing documents that have no legal effect, or which are otherwise legal fictions. All lawyers are officers of the court and are obliged not to participate in the preparation of a document that resembles a court document or any other document intended to deceive the recipient.

In the 2012 Queen’s Bench decision of Meads v. Meads, Mr. Justice Rooke identified the individuals presenting such documents for notarization as “Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument” litigants (OPCA litigants). Other identifying names for them are “Freemen on the Land”, “Sovereign Citizens” or “de-taxers”. The decision provides an excellent summary of the characteristics of OPCA litigants and is worth reading to assist lawyers in identifying these individuals. A summarized version of the decision is also available here.

A more recent posting refers to a decision in ANB v Hancock, 2013 ABQB 97.

Lawyers should also be aware of potential threats to their personal safety. The ANB v. Hancock decision is an example of a matter in which lawyers were allowed to be identified by pseudonyms to protect their anonymity. The Law Society of British Columbia has posted a bulletin on its website recommending that lawyers have a workplace security plan in place to deal with external threats to their offices.

09-26-2013, 10:20 AM	#222
troutman Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Crowsnest Pass Exp:	What's New OPCA Litigants – The Phenomenon of Freemen on the Land http://www.lawsociety.ab.ca/publicat..._the_Land.aspx In Advisory articles in 2003 and 2009, the Law Society of Alberta cautioned lawyers not to engage in notarizing documents that have no legal effect, or which are otherwise legal fictions. All lawyers are officers of the court and are obliged not to participate in the preparation of a document that resembles a court document or any other document intended to deceive the recipient. In the 2012 Queen’s Bench decision of Meads v. Meads, Mr. Justice Rooke identified the individuals presenting such documents for notarization as “Organized Pseudolegal Commercial Argument” litigants (OPCA litigants). Other identifying names for them are “Freemen on the Land”, “Sovereign Citizens” or “de-taxers”. The decision provides an excellent summary of the characteristics of OPCA litigants and is worth reading to assist lawyers in identifying these individuals. A summarized version of the decision is also available here. A more recent posting refers to a decision in ANB v Hancock, 2013 ABQB 97. Lawyers should also be aware of potential threats to their personal safety. The ANB v. Hancock decision is an example of a matter in which lawyers were allowed to be identified by pseudonyms to protect their anonymity. The Law Society of British Columbia has posted a bulletin on its website recommending that lawyers have a workplace security plan in place to deal with external threats to their offices.