-For Case Laws - Court Decisions - Outcome of Cases in Ontario Courts won by A1 Legal Services Firm -Good News; Australian Nannie Victim, retained the services of A1 Legal who took the Defendants to Court and recovers money paid to a Canadian Employment Agency; Thanks to the world of Internet and a honest Rep."Says Plaintiff" Read case-outcome in the News & Events Link page.

!!Click here for Online Legal Directory !!!!-or to add a company name ::

Local; 416-751-1712 Toll Free;1-888-534-2579 Fax.416-438-0438

{Also see below case's and settlement by firm.} and feedback''

"MOTTO" Efficient, Reliable, & Reasonable

NOTE: Free LEGAL LINE -Information 24 hrs --416-929-8400 -- --1-877-929-8800

-www.LegalLine.ca.

---(Established Since 1990. Fully Certified, Licensed & Insured.)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Case Laws-Court Decisions - Judgment- Outcome Media news.;

Case#1 Court file # T-69369-02

:Civil Litigation (Small Claims Court)

A1 Legal Services & Training Ltd. CASE OF THE YEAR 2003 (Final) Peter A. Black vs. Model Quest International Scouts (MQIS) a.k.a. Lovenow.com. The Peter A. Black case make's history in the Toronto Small Claims Court. Mr. Black decided to take MQIS to court after he answered to a newspaper ad "for male models wanted to shoot porn movies". Mr. Black jumped to the opportunity and invested about $2,500.00 and was told that he would make $500.00 to $1000.00 a day staring in bed with a beautiful woman. He pursued with this venture and later found out that the Defendant was jerking him around he was fortunate to observe an editorial in the Toronto Sun Newspaper by one Mike Strobel (writer) who has been monitoring and investigating the Defendant's behavioral patterns for years, he later contacted the legend of A1 Legal Services and launched the maximum claim of $10,000.00 against the Defendant, interestingly the Sun writer Mr. Strobel was fascinated about the case in that he has been writing series of stories on the Defendant for some time. The first series about Peter Black was published on July 3, 2003 bearing headline as "Best-Laid Plans" would- be porn star feels let down.--- The second was on July 7, 2003 with headline "Peter lays out case-porn star seeks justice in Small Claims Court".--- The third segments on July 10, 2003 with heading "The Peter Principles - A stars 10 tips for achieving stardom in the porno film business.--- All of this led Mr. Black to a live Radio interview with Humble and Fred on MOJO Talk Radio, who asked the Plaintiff what was it like?, What qualified you as a porn star? and so on.--- Notwithstanding the latest media to jump on the Peter's Wagon was some what surprisingly, in that the Toronto Life Magazine wanted a piece of the media porn frenzy and published the story in the January 2004 Issue see page 81, titled "WE'VE GOT WOOD 111".--- In addition another segment by Mike Strobel was posted in the Toronto Sun on January 6, 2004 titled "XXX-TREME FAILURE -Turns out, porn doesn't sell on Yonge St. " The Legal counsel for the Defendant is optimists that a settlement can be reached on this case which is rescheduled for trial late February 2004. Now Lincoln Allen, Esq. the legal rep. for the Plaintiff does have his hands full and is hoping that a settlement can be reached, and was asked by Mr. Black what next is forthcoming or to be published? The answer to Peter after reading my crystal ball on the desk is that he should seriously considering finding a creditable casting Agent to do a true story (movie) of this sex ordeal. I am positive he would make an excellent candidate for the porn industry. His DVD'S are ready to be purchased if you need one -- Note; to have real fun of the action --upon viewing it would be a good idea to have some chill icewine handy. On conclusion, we do have our eyes and ears open, hoping that a Hollywood Film Producer's in the film industry or (some spectrum) will hop on this venture, seeing that this is the right time to do so, everyone is " HOT HOT" or possible a book deal could be in the works. And why not? He's a camera-ready guest with a lot of experience and potential. Now the intake department at A1 Legal Services is busy with other individuals who are also looking for their DVD'S, funds and royalties from the company.

Good Luck Peter.

Case concluded and end on Feb. 25, 2004 - See - read article from Mike Strobel in Toronto Sun Newspaper on Feb.26, 2004. Page 12.

Sex that didn't sell--!!!

For a winnable porn star, suing the Toronto production company provides his only relief

"No more porno biz for me," says Peter A. Black. He says this though he has just won his case against MQIS Inc., AKA love-now.com, in a sort of split decision. MQIS AKA is a porn-production outfit operating from a Sheppard Ave. W. bungalow. I first wrote about it in January 2002. You may recall I was up for a role in Phys-Ed 101. Leila, a leggy casting director, said old bald guys were all the rage in porn. The price of fame? Five bills for $2,500 to invest in my own first flick. Payment? A hundred DVDs of Phys-Ed 101, which I could sell, for a tidy profit, to family and friends. What a deal, eh? Well, lots of fellas bit. Black, 36, is the first to sue. He took MQIS AKA to small claims court, seeking $10,000 for breach of contract. He got screwed, he said, and he didn't just mean for his debut in the DVD Body Shop. It was shot mid-2001. You can imagine the courtroom yesterday. I keep waiting for Jerry Springer to bound in. Regular Joes Who Wanna Be Porn Stars! Or for Madame Justice Pamela Thomson to bust out laughing. "So there's a script?" she asks dryly, as Sam MacMurchy tells how he directs/shoots MQIS films for a mysterious Costa Rican company called Rainforest Dreams. Thomson is a sharp knife. She could be a Judge Judy. "Does the script have a plot? Does it have dialogue?" Her eyes are grinning. "Absolutely,"says MacMurchy, though Black remembers the dialogue as mostly grunts. MQIS, or NMST or whatever it's called now, is represented by the magically named Romeo Finder. He is your classic tailored lawyer. Black, says Finder, "was never promised he was going to be a star. "He knew exactly what he was getting into." A contract is a contract. He says his client promotes DVDs, including Body Shop, on assorted Web sites. Lo and behold, he brings Black's first royalty cheque to court, $153.47. Black has hired lanky Lincoln Allen, a Scarborough Paralegal. Black testifies he has struggled to sell 100 DVDs. Finally, he unloaded three dozen on a downtown adult magazine store. For a buck each. I do not know how other Body Shop stars are faring. It features "35 Fresh New Faces in Sizzling Action." The MQIS spiel suggests you can get up to $80 a pop. Black's only big sale, $50, was to a newspaper columnist researching the case. Me. I cannot bring myself to watch it. Nor have I figured out how to expense it. MQIS still operates, as NMST, a stone's throw from the courthouse. Thomson lays into 'em. Of the portfolio pitch, she says: "This is a famous ploy of some modeling agencies, most of which have thankfully been put out of business." But it's the method of payment that wins Black the case. The MQIS contract says the 100 DVDs cover your investment and a juicy sounding $1,000-a-day acting fee. Black is out of luck on the former, rules Thomson. An investment means risk. "It is not the job of the court or of the law, " she says, "to protect people from themselves." From "the human qualities, which we all have, of vanity and greed." The $1,000 wage offer is another matter, the judge says. The DVDs, especially when they sell for a buck or two, are no substitute. She awards Black $1,000, plus costs. So, where is our friend Peter? He didn't get jobs 10 grand. But he keeps the, oh, $150 he made peddling Body Shop. He has another one to sell, now that Exhibit 8 has been returned to him. He has that first royalty cheque, with hopes of more. And now he gets $1,000 for having had sex with a redhead in a North York condo. Not too shabby. What's your next career move, Peter? "Maybe something in construction," he says.

Lincoln Allen, Esq. Legal Rep. for Plaintiff

Mike Strobel's Sun column runs daily, Monday to Thursday. Call him at 416-947-2265. Email: mike.strobel@tor.sunpub.com

Toronto Life January 2004 Issue page 81- comments as follows:

WE'VE GOT WOOD 111

Goodwill employee Peter A. Black took Model Quest International Scouts to small claims court in July, crushed that the Sheppard Ave. operation hadn't turned him into a porn star. He'd answer an ad in the Sun("Have Fun Working With Gorgeous Models") and was persuaded to "invest" $2, 500.00 for a flick shot in 45 minutes at a North York Novatel. "I was nervous at first," he said, but after, I was jumping up and down and thinking, I did it!",Eight months later, when he still couden't find his movie at the video store, Black launched his case. At press time, a decision was pending. Note: Decision is outline in the above article.

Note: all interested parties can e-mail all inquires and comments etc. to: justice@a1legalservices.com or a1legal@sympatico.ca or Tel: 416-751-1712-or Toll free 1-866-291-2579. CANADA & USA

Case # 2 -Employment Law;

Case's of the Month; November 2003 and Outcome. No.41013043

RE:Employment Standards Act, 2000. Issue (Pregnancy Leave)

Biring (Employee) vs. Woodbridge Montessori School (Employer)

Panel Member: Ministry of Labour - Employment Standards Officer

Woodbridge Montessori School ;Rep. Owner of Employer

Conclusion: Case heard in Newmarket, Ontario on November 19, 2003, Settlement reach the Employer to pay the Employee an undisclosed sum of $$$ under the E.S.A. Sec. 112(1). Facts withheld.

Lincoln Allen, Esq. Legal Rep for Claimant Mrs. P. Biring

Case #3 Immigration Law:

Mufutau Agboola Adebayo vs.Canada Citizenship Immigration:

Case and outcome; As Published in the Share News Paper July 6,1995 by Ron Fanfair (Writer):

Third time lucky!

A Nigerian, whose application for refugee status in Canada was turned down twice, is being allowed to remain on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. Mufutau Agboola Adebayo fled his homeland in 1993, after President Ibrahim Babangida caused the annulment of the general elections almost certainly won by publishing magnate Moshood Abiola. Babangida was subsequently replaced, as was his successor, and General Sani Abacha took over with a military government, which is still in power. Claiming that he was being targeted by the military government, Abebayo fled to the United States before entering Canada, where he quickly applied for refugee status. He was refused recognition as a Convention Refugee in March, 1994, and his request to appeal the decision to the Immigration and Refugee Board was turned down. Facing a deportation order, Adebayo turned to A1 Legal Services for help. "We were his last line of hope," said Lincoln Allen, the director of the Scarborough-based Paralegal Agency. "I recognized that he had a case for humanitarian and compassionate grounds, and promptly pursed a well mapped out course." Immigration Canada heard the case and ruled that Adebayo can remain in Canada. "This case clearly shows that here is a place for Paralegals in the legal system," said Allen. The Jamaican-born counselors stressed that preparation was the key to the Adebayo case. "We got clippings from newspapers, which recorded the problems in Nigeria, and also presented transcripts from his courses, because he was attending continuing education classes here," Allen explained. Adebayo, who is single and is employed as a general helper at Bay Form Mill, he intends to pursue his education and reunite his family, which is still in Nigeria.

Lincoln Allen, Esq. Counsel for Mr.Adebayo

_______________________________________________________

Case# 4 (C.P.P.) CANADA PENSION PLAN

IN THE PENSION APPEALS BOARD

August 27,1998

RE: THE CANADA PENSION PLAN

BETWEEN: IOLANDA DIONISI(Appellant)

vs.

THE MINISTER OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT (Respondent)

Conclusion:

DECISION: The parties having consented to judgment in the above-mentioned appeal and said Consent to Judgment having been submitted to and approved by the Chairman of the Pension Appeals Board.

THIS BOARD DOTH ORDER AND ADJUDGE that this appeal be and the same is allowed, that the decision of the Review Tribunal be and the same is varied and, proceeding to make the determination which should have been made by the said Review Tribunal dated the31st day of October 1993, DOTH DECLARE that the Appellant became disabled within the meaning of Section 42(2)(a) of the Canada Pension Plan in the month of December, 1995, and that she is entitled to a disability pension under the said Plan commencing in the month of April, 1996.

Lincoln Allen, Esq. Legal Rep. for Applicant.

_______________________________________________________

Case #5 Court file #01-BN-11258

- Civil Litigation.

MANDEEP PANESAR (Plaintiff)

vs.

ROYAL BANK OF CANADA (Defendant)

Summary of Case: On October 20, 2001 the plaintiff filed a claim against the defendant. The defendant realized that the said plaintiff had a sum of $9,292.71 missing from her bank account. Upon complaints to the bank directly, she was advised that pending an internal investigation, if it was satisfied that the plaintiff did not make any withdrawals, then the defendants would reimburse the plaintiff the money. Videotapes were reviewed in order to ensure that the plaintiff was not responsible for the funds missing from her account. The plaintiff swore and signed an Affidavit to support her innocence in addition to the outcome of the investigation, which showed the plaintiff was not responsible. The plaintiff was asked by the defendant to report the missing funds to the police. The plaintiff complied to the request. The plaintiff was then redirected to the Fraud Bureau who advised her that the defendant is responsible. The plaintiff was also advised that the defendant is responsible for handling the case and resolving the issue. The plaintiff did not receive any of the promised funds, and as a result requested to commence legal proceedings against the said defendant.

Conclusion: Case was heard in Brampton Small Claims Court. on June 24, 2002.The plaintiff was awarded payment from Royal Bank of Canada (defendant) in the sum of $8,828.07 (Eight Thousand and Eight Hundred and Twenty Eight Dollars and seven cents). This sum was to settle the matter, of Claim.

Lincoln Allen, Legal Rep. for Plaintiff

--------------------------------

Case #6 Court file #02-BN-11316

- Civil Litigation.(Wrongful dismissal)

LAURA - LYNN Q. MOLNAR(Plaintiff)

vs.

THE WENLEIGH NURSING HOME(Defendant)

Summary of Case: On or about April 2001 the plaintiff acquire a part-time position with the defendant and work in the capacity as a unit clerk and on or about January 2002 obtained a full - time position as a Nursing Secretary. The plaintiff states that she was off work for holidays from August 8 to August 14th 2002 as agreed by the defendant the plaintiff got married on August 10th 2002. And return to work very soon after.

The plaintiff states that on August 20th 2002 she felt ill in the afternoon and had to attend to her family physician that assessed her as unable to work August 21st and 22nd, 2002. The plaintiff informed the defendant of her unavailability to work due to illness. The plaintiff states that on August 22, 2002 in the afternoon she received a telephone call from the supervisor advising her not to come in on August 23, 2002 for her schedule shift, the plaintiff later showed up for work and was handed a letter of immediate termination.

Judgment(Dated at Brampton this 17th day of August, 2005): The plaintiff was employed with defendant part-time as a unit clerk for approximately nine months, the full time as nursing secretary for seven months, until her termination on August 22, 2002. At the time of her termination, she was about 24 years old, earning $13.57 per hour, for 37.5 hours per week.

The plaintiff claims for severance pay of $555.50, wrongful dismissal notice of three and a half months wages for $7,388.50, outstanding vacation pay of $555.00, and punitive damages of $1,500.00.

The precipitating event for the plaintiff's termination appears to be her absence due to illness on August 21 and 22, 2002. There is some disagreement as to whether the plaintiff resigned or was terminated. It also appears that the plaintiff called to advise she would not be in to work on August 22, 2002, but the message did not make it to her immediate supervisor until some time later. In the interim, the defendant's administrator found several of the plaintiff's personal computer files on the office computer used by the plaintiff, which lead to the inference that the plaintiff was spending considerable work time on personal matters.

The defendant provided one weeks' pay at termination in the amount of $506.73, plus a cheque for $202.68 for August 19 and 20/02 (unpaid days worked), both of which the plaintiff cashed.

The defendant states that the plaintiff had already taken more than her allotment of two weeks vacation time at the time of her departure.

After a review of the evidence, I find that the plaintiff was terminated rather than having voluntarily resigned. Her termination was not for cause. In fact, the defendant probably did not follow its own internal procedures of giving progressive discipline to an employee prior to termination. Even if this internal procedure did not apply to the plaintiff, it would have been prudent. Also, the use of the computer by the plaintiff was not a sufficient reason for immediate termination. As a result, I find that the plaintiff is entitled to reasonable notice of termination.

The plaintiff worked for the defendant for a total of one year and four months, of which nine months was part-time employment. I find that the plaintiff is not entitled to vacation pay, having already received it for the year. Severance pay is not applicable, as was alleged by the plaintiff, and I do not find that the circumstances of this case warrants an award of punitive damages.

I find that a reasonable period of notice in this case is one month. The plaintiff has already received $506.73 for one weeks' pay. I award the plaintiff a further three weeks pay, which, at $506.73 per week, totals $1,520.19.

Given that the offer made by the defendant was in excess of this decision, it is appropriate that the Defendant receive costs of this action which I set at $300.00 inclusive of fee and disbursements.

Lincoln Allen, Legal Rep. for Plaintiff

Syll Kushner, student-at-law, for the Defendant

-----------------------------------------------------------------

;Call for more info. Ph. 416-751-1712 toll free 1-866-291-2579 or E-MAIL:info@a1legalservices.com