A Portrait of Querulous Behavior (2008)
DOSSIER: EXTREME BEHAVIOR Querulousness and Vexatious Behaviors |
1. |
Extreme Behavior |
2. |
Extreme Behavior – “Querulousness” by Dr. Jacques Gagnon |
3. |
Extreme Behavior – “Judicial Control of Querulous Litigants” by Mr. Justice [sic] Yves-Marie Morissette |
4. |
Extreme Behavior – “A Portrait of Querulous Behavior” by Le Spécialiste “with the kind collaboration of Mr. Justice Y.-M. Morissette” |
| 5. |
Elsevier – “Evaluation de la dangerosité du malade mental psychotique” / “Dangerousness evaluation of psychotic patient” by F. Millaud and J.-L. Dubreucq, Psychiatrists. (Available online in 2005) [This is a French article with a bilingual abstract. Judicial Madness has provided an exclusive English translation of the article.] |
4.
Le Spécialiste, The FMSQ Magazine Vol. 10 no. 1 – March 2008, EXTREME BEHAVIOR, Dossier.
Querulousness and Vexatious Behaviors, Dangerous Behavior. A Portrait of Querulous Behavior.
EXTREME BEHAVIOR
A Portrait of Querulous Behavior (2008)
Source: Le Spécialiste, The FMSQ Magazine Vol. 10 no. 1 – March 2008, EXTREME BEHAVIOR, Querulousness and Vexatious Behaviors, Dangerous Behavior (Cover). Download the English edition of the magazine here: Vol 10 no 1 Le Spécialiste, The FMSQ Magazine Vol. 10 no. 1 – March 2008. Special issue featuring a “Dossier” on EXTREME BEHAVIOR
Download the French edition of the same magazine here:
Querulous litigants are opinionated and narcissistic. If, in a society with a fully mature legal system, each person always took advantage of his subjective rights as he perceived them before the trial, everyone would be constantly making applications to the courts and it is probable that life in such a society would become intolerable. The law must have some room for manoeuvre, and most people understand that intuitively. It may be one of the reasons, at least partly, for the high number of actions that are resolved before coming to trial. But this fact escapes querulous litigants, for whom confrontation with an honest contradictor exacerbates their feelings of injustice. Any opposition therefore is likely to result on their side in new claims which will be pursued to the very end.
Querulous litigants tend to act as claimants rather than defendants — and, given the wide-ranging means that they use, the opposing party would also risk being taxed with stubbornness, if it were not for the fact that the latter is forced, since it cannot choose the means, to defend itself inch by inch.
Querulous litigants multiply the number of actions they take, including against court employees. It is fairly common, in fact, for such proceedings and complaints to be made against lawyers, court staff or even judges personally, with complaints of bias or ethical misconduct.
Reiteration of the same questions in successive and amplified proceedings and the search for the same results despite the repeated dismissal of previous claims is frequent. The querulous party generally negotiates upwards and, if damages are claimed, the amounts tend to increase along the way as the number of proceedings grows.
Legal arguments put forward by querulous litigants are notable because of their inventiveness and incongruity. They certainty appear judicial in form, but they are barely rational. The position adopted by the plaintiff in the main Byer affair (based on an extravagant reading of one section of the Insurance Act) or by Fabrikant in one of his numerous cases (invoking a law passed in 1495 during the reign of Henry VIII as foundation for an appeal in forma pauperis) are just two examples.
The repeated failure of actions brought by querulous litigant’s results, sooner or later, in an inability to pay legal expenses and costs awarded against them. This precise situation was invoked in Grepe v. Loam, the first decision reported in English law where a litigant was required to obtain legal permission prior to his claim being presented in court. This situation is difficult to evaluate, because it is more a matter of judicial sociology, but it may well deserve in-depth study.
Querulous litigants appeal most, it not all, adverse decisions or apply tor their revision or retraction.
Finally, as previously noted, querulous litigants represent themselves.
Source: Yves-Marie Morissette, Abus de droit, querulence et parties non representees (2003), 49 Revue de droit de McGill 23, pp. 30-1. See also Lester, Grant, Beth Wilson, Lynn Griffin and Paul E. Mullen, “Unusually Persistent Complainants” (2004), 184 British Journal of Psychiatry, pp. 352-6. 
Afterword: See the extremely interesting reply to Lester et al by Dr. R. Pal, in the British Journal of Psychiatry: In Defence of Complainants. Admin JMad.
Yves-Marie Morissette's Poster Boy for 'Legalizing' Chemical Lobotomies: Valéry Fabrikant
Judicial Madness Signature Video & Sharing Buttons
