Or: How One Lawyer Chaired a Meeting and Left their Spine at the Door
Let’s talk about neutrality. That shimmering virtue every condo lawyer loves to print on their forehead – right before they take the mic, smile politely, and swing the axe.
Enter: The Independent Chair. You know the type. Billed as neutral. Branded as fair. Hired to “ensure decorum” at what turns out to be a thinly disguised public execution.
In my case? She chaired the meeting where I was removed from the board – a meeting so tilted it could’ve been sponsored by the Leaning Tower of Pisa.
And when my partner was attacked publicly by Blazer (our board’s own budget Mussolini), she silenced him. He wasn’t allowed to speak.
Not even a polite rebuttal. Not even a basic defense. Just: “We’re moving on.”
So yes, she claims she was neutral. Like Switzerland. If Switzerland also drafted the battle plan.
👏 But Wait – It Gets Funnier.
A few months later, as I sat sipping beer and doom-scrolling LinkedIn, something miraculous happened.
An article popped into my feed. Not just any article – a cringe-worthy fluff piece on our appeal, written by… a property manager. A non-lawyer. A glorified clipboard.
No legal citations, no understanding of CAT procedure – just the usual corporate cheerleading dressed up as “thought leadership.”
And there it was, glowing in the comments:
👏👏👏 Well done! Excellent summary!
– Guess Who? Our Neutral Chair.
Apparently, being “neutral” means applauding articles written by people who don’t even know the Human Rights Code trumps condo rules.
If neutrality were a mattress, this one comes with springs popping out the side and a visible bloodstain.
🎓 When Condoland Echoes Louder Than the Courts
You might think that after a unanimous ruling by three Superior Court judges – each with actual legal training, precedent-reading ability, and a general allergy to nonsense – the matter would be settled.
But no.
In our charming little strata of reality called Condoland™, there’s a special breed of arrogance where a property manager with a certificate that requires (1) a pulse and (2) a high-school diploma, feels fully qualified to override the judiciary with a LinkedIn article.
And the real kicker?
A lawyer applauded it.
Not just any lawyer – but the very one who chaired the meeting where my partner was muzzled like a rogue defendant at a banana republic tribunal. She who wielded “neutrality” like a lightsaber, only to slice one side of the room.
Imagine clapping for a toddler’s crayon sketch right after Da Vinci walked in.
But this is condo law – where facts are optional, feelings are doctrine, and legal nuance is whatever the property manager read in last month’s trade newsletter.
🧑⚖️ The Bench vs. the Benchwarmer
Let’s be clear:
- Three Superior Court judges – with combined decades on the bench – read the record, applied the law, and dismissed the condo corporation’s appeal.
- The property manager? He read the decision wrong, misunderstood the law, and got applauded by a lawyer who once claimed to be “independent.”
Is it incompetence? Is it sycophancy? Or just a desperate desire to stay in the in-crowd of condo consultants who think due process is a speed bump?
Either way: I saw the applause. It’s public. And it’s damning.
🎭 Final Act: The LinkedIn “Like” Heard Round My Network
The only reason I saw it. We happen to share a mutual connection.
What are the odds?
Apparently the same as a so-called “independent lawyer” resisting the urge to join the condo clique in a chorus of self-congratulations.
So to all those hiding behind the word “independent” while enabling bullying, silencing targets, and applauding propaganda:
We see you.
And next time you chair a meeting?
Try bringing both a gavel and a conscience.
Disclaimer: This post is satire and opinion. Read full disclaimer.
