I need help to redoing a disclosure as a Respondent to answering for the Applicant's disclosure,

Hint for what i needed:

For our opening statements can you use the language of we will prove to you x. Insert our facts into x such as we will prove Mr. Angel has cooperated. We will prove Mr. Angel did reply promptly. We will prove Miss Clark did not send proper notices. ECT. We want this to sound like Ms. Clarke was fixated on our client and was obsessed with proving him guilty and throwing proper procedure aside to do so. Can you please also include a small blurb about how apologetic Mr. Angel is about his improper bookkeeping. And we understand how important that is to the law society and their investigation. Mr. Angel has taken steps to remedy this by hiring a new accountant. The risk of re-offenses is low and there is no disciplinary history. The LSO has a valid argument and we agree and understand.

Disclosure of the Applicant/LSO:

Disclosure

Requested by Ms. Clarke and the LSO from David Angel:

1.General and Trust account statements (June 2021 to May 2022

*Including images of the instruments received and disbursed

2.Letters from the bank confirming that Mr. Angel's trust account was closed and its balance at closing.

3.General and Trust ledgers

4.Receipts and disbursement journals with supporting documentation

5.Explanation of "X's" role, and contact information

6.Explanation of where and how funds provided by client were used

7.Evidence of investment; or in the case of non-investment of funds, evidence that the monies were not used, i.e., where unused investment funds were held including supporting documentation.

8.Explanation of how any repayments were made to "X"

9.Any additional supporting documentation to aid in the investigation

This includes "reasonable" explanations of the following:

-An explanation asking for the details of the court matter that made it impossible for Mr. Angel to meet at his office on March 21, 2022

-Reason(s) why the March 26, 2022, deadline could not be met

Witness(es):

Ms. Theresa Clarke

Daisy Armstrong (complainant)

Supporting Evidence:

1.transaction histories provided by Mr. Gauthier on April 4th, 2022, dated for the months of April 2020 through to and including December 2020

2.Affidavit from a former neighbour at Mr. Angel's old business address

3.Affidavit from a former neighbour at Mr. Angel's old residential address

4.Affidavit of service from courier, Mr.Mark Service

5. Copies of the Demand letters sent by Ms. Clarke

6.Copies of correspondence (emails) between Ben Gauthier and Ms. Clarke

7.Copies correspondence (emails) between David Angel and Ms. Clarke

8.Transcriptions of telephone conversations between Ms. Clarke, Mr. Gauthier and Mr. Angel

9.Copies of 2 NSF cheques issued to the Daisy Armstrong by unknown third-party

Disclosure of the Respondent/Mr. Angel (this need to redoing)

The disclosure for Mr. Angel / Respondent is as follows:

1.The defense will argue for Mr. Angel, has unfairly accused of failing to comply with Paralegal Rules of Conduct 9.01(1) A paralegal shall reply promptly and completely to any communication from the Law Society and shall provide a complete response to any request from the Law Society.

2.The defense will argue that Mr. Angel's trust account was closed and its balance at closing.

3.The defense will be show that for a period of six months, Mr. Angel provide to the monitoring and enforcement department of the Society on a monthly basis, by no later than the 25thof each month, a copy of his monthly trust comparisons, client trust listings, trust reconciliations and trust bank statements

4.The defense will also argue that Mr. Angel's explanation of LSO's involvement in the matter, his mailing address, e-mail address and phone number are all valid.

5.The defense will be pointing that the Respondent reacted promptly, and extended authorization to the investigator to get any required documentation directly from the financial institution.

6.The defense will be show that the Respondent replied to communications from the Investigator and complied, to the best of his ability, with the requests of the Law Society, within the time frames provided.

7.Mr. Angel agrees to this undertaking If there needs to be a fine, a conditional fine of $2,000 payable ONLY if Mr. Angel fails to comply with the requirement to rehabilitate his bookkeeping.

Witnesses:

Ms. Clarke

Ben Gauthier

The Case Laws that will be relied on:

Law Society of Upper Canada v. Cherif Rafik Ghobrial, 2014 ONLSHP 5 (CanLII)

Law Society of Ontario v. Shaw, 2022 ONLSTH 31 (CanLII)

Law Society of Upper Canada v. Jay Rudolph Bradley, 2014 ONLSHP 23 (CanLII)

The statutes that will be relied on in this case are the following:

Law Society Act, RSO 1990, c L.8 s. 42(2)

Paralegal rules of conduct rule 7.02(1)

Fact Situation The Law Society of Ontario (LSO) has brought an application alleging that David Angel, a paralegal, failed to maintain books and records as required by By-law 9. The LSO also asserted that the paralegal engaged in professional misconduct by failing to co-operate with a Law Society investigation. The paralegal was licensed in 2015, has worked as a sole practitioner, and has no prior discipline history. The application stems from a complaint the LSO received from an individual who stated she hired Mr. Angel to pursue investment opportunities in mortgages. The complainant stated: In April and May of YR-00 she provided Mr. Angel with $50,000 for investment purposes, with $2000.00 of that being for a personal load to Mr. Angel; She provided copies of cheques made payable to Mr. Angel in trust; She eventually received two cheques from an unknown individual ("X"), dated November YR-00 related to the loans. Both cheques were NSF and copies were provided. She stated that Mr. Angel now refuses to answer her phone calls or respond to messages. The LSO authorized an investigation into this complaint on issues as to whether Mr. Angel may have participated in improper fraudulent investment schemes, used his trust account for improper purposes and failed to repay a personal loan. Theresa Clarke was assigned the investigation.

LAW SOCIETY TRIBUNAL

HEARING DIVISION

NOTICE OF APPLICATION CONDUCT

To the respondent: The Law Society of Ontario applies under s. 34(1) of the Law Society Act, RSO 1990,c.L.8 for a determination of whether you have contravened s.33 by engaging in professional misconduct and/or conduct unbecoming a licensee and for an order under s.35. Details of the allegations are set out below. This Notice of Application is served together with an Information Sheet that sets out the next steps in the proceeding.

Additional Information:

Mr. Angels has not provided the following the items:

Mr. Angel's general and trust account bank statements from June YR-00 to May YR-01 including images of the instruments received and disbursed.

Letters from the bank confirming that Mr. Angel's trust account was closed and its balance at closing.

Explanation of L's involvement in the matter, his mailing address, e-mail address and phone number.

Explanation as to how the funds were used. The related supporting documents for repayments made to the complainant, if any, when and if such repayments were made.

Five days prior to the hearing, Mr. Angel informs you that he would like to voluntarily admit that he engaged in professional misconduct for failing to maintain books and records.