Sc 105 Request for Court Order and Answer Form

As asked of me specifically;The others are right, you will likely need a lawyer. But to answer your question, there is a response form to respond to a restraining order or order of protection. Worst case the form is available at the courthouse where your hearing is set to be heard in, typically at the appropriate clerk's window, which may vary, so ask any of the clerk's when you get there.You only have so many days to respond, and it will specify in the paperwork.You will also have to appear in court on the date your hearing is scheduled.Most courts have a department that will help you respond to forms at no cost. I figure you are asking because you can't afford an attorney which is completely understandable.The problem is that if you aren't represented and the other person is successful in getting a temporary restraining order made permanent in the hearing you will not be allowed at any of the places the petitioner goes, without risking arrest.I hope this helps.Not given as legal advice-

You can represent yourself. Each form is different per state or county but generally an answer is simply a written document which presents a synopsis of your story to the court. The answer is not your defense, just written notice to the court that you intend to contest the suit. The blank forms are available at the court clerk’s office and are pretty much self explanatoryThere will be a space calling for the signature of an attorney. You should sign your name on the space and write the words “Pro se” after your signature. This lets the court know you are acting as your own attorney.

The minimum that I know people got accepted is from 450 to 470 points.Usually when you fill up the information it tells you straight up if you are in the pool or not.By experience Canada’a express entry system is THE WORST THING EVER happened to the Canada’s immigration. It is literally a nightmare! The portal crashes, and sometimes only open between midnight and 3am. You literally need to be the luckiest person to have it work normally. What is worst about it: Is that the Canadian government keeps on saying they will fix issues, and in the same time calling it the best system ever, where it is the worst system I have ever seen. NO technical support whatsoever.Good luck in your application.My advice also, Canada is not as it advertises. It s quite hard out there, and people are racist (not to your face, but we a smile and in their mind, which is to the worst).I do not recommend Canada as a land for immigration, but I recommend Canada for studying. Schools there are pretty multicultural, and you do not feel the racism only when you go in the labour market or create your company.

What is relevant, is that you need a lawyer to do this successfully. Civil rights is an area of law that for practical purposes cannot be understood without training. The police officer will have several experts defending if you sue. Unless you have a lawyer you will be out of luck. If you post details on line, the LEO's lawyers will be able to use this for their purpose. You need a lawyer who knows civil rights in your jurisdiction.Don't try this by yourself.Get a lawyer. Most of the time initial consultations are free.

When I was much younger I used to think it was actually against the law not to put ‘C.of.E’ on those forms that asked this question.For those not in the UK, it stands for “Church of England”, which would be the Established Anglican Church.This is despite me being an atheist since well before anybody would ask me to fill in forms.I think it was because the church is an established church; it appeared at public ceremonies, and on TV, and sent Bishops to the House of Lords; people asked religious figures their opinions about events, and listened to the answer. The established church was undeniably a power. I wondered, as a teen, if they might send the religious police* after me if I put “no” or “not applicable” or even “why on earth are you asking me this question?”It seems lunatic, now, but that was in the 1970s, and the country had a sort of wordless “You must be Christian!” attitude. I felt I didn’t want to prejudice anyone in authority against me. Would it have done? I’m not sure. When I had discussions with anyone who might possibly be in authority, and mentioned that I was an atheist, I was treated partly with disdain, and partly as if anything I said was laughable.These days I’d stand up and give them both barrels. But I was young, then.I should add that, after I experimented with putting “n/a” on forms, and there was no knock on the door at 3 a.m., I took to just marking a slash through the box. If the question makes no sense, there’s no point dignifying it with an answer.All the same, if you want to be pedantic, I’d put “none” for people with no religion, and “n/a” for agnostics and atheists, since they’re most likely to think the question isn’t applicable to them.*I should add that I never saw any evidence of there being any ‘religious police’. Call it a tribute to how pervasive the sense of organised religion was in the UK at that time. Granted the Anglican church is pretty lukewarm compared to some other countries’ churches, but it was still capable of making itself felt.