D. M. v. Anna-Laberge Hospital (English)

This is NOT an official Law Report. You cannot present this page in court, by photocopying or otherwise. If you need this report for a case, you must get the official law report. For this purpose, you may inquire with a Reference Librarian at an accredited (i.e., university) law library.

Non-Official English Translation

Citizen Critical of Government sent back to Loony Bin for a “Closed Cure” due to his alleged “Quarrelsomeness toward the C.S.S.T.

His father has “contempt” for him, he had an “altercation” with his sister, and he’s been suing the C.S.S.T. for appropriate compensation following broken vertebrae in a work-related accident. He says he can’t work, he needs physiotherapy and readjustment, not psychiatric treatments. He’s angry because the C.S.S.T. is not providing what he says he needs for his physical recovery. Three officials on a mere administrative board send the young man back to the lunatic asylum on the ground of his “quérulence” because he’s still mad at the C.S.S.T.

What is the C.S.S.T.?  The acronym is short for the French name Commission de la Santé et de la Sécurité au Travail. In English, that would be the “Work Health and Safety Board”, but that’s not an official name. The C.S.S.T. is a socialist style government body created by statute to supervise the allotment of medical care to victims of job-related injuries. The following short judgment might be a good advertisement for private medical insurance.

Speculation: This fellow’s lawyer apparently filed a motion which obliged his own client to prove that he was entitled to be set free from civil detention in a mental hospital. The three-person panel of this purely administrative tribunal objected that the lawyer had pleaded as though he were trying to appeal from the original judgment at the Court of Quebec, rather than pleading in respect to the motion for this hearing. In order to obtain his client’s release, the man’s lawyer would likely have been better off filing a motion for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, which puts the onus on those detaining the man to prove that he needs to be detained. In particular, in seeking such a writ, his lawyer should have commenced with the obvious legal prohibition of civil detention other than for contempt of court, set out clearly at Article 1 of the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure.
Another pleading that the lawyer should likely have raised in a vigorous defense of his client would have be the suspect motives of the government in detaining this man, i.e., to prevent him from eventually establishing a legal precedent against the government and the C.S.S.T. by suing the latter to pay for the health-related expenses which the man himself viewed as necessary to his own physical recovery. What we seem to see here is the view of the State as to a man’s health requirements being substituted for his own personal estimate of his own health needs after serious injuries in a work-related accident. This little case might be a good advertisement for personal medical insurance. Have your own health insurance, or risk the lunatic asylum in battling for your own rights with your socialist Nanny Government. So, who is this lawyer? Inexperienced? Legal Aid? Or controlled opposition? Why is the man incarcerated as a lunatic for suing the C.S.S.T. for proper medical services relating to the broken vertebrae in his back?


Source: (Original citation in French): D. M. c. Centre hospitalier Anna-Laberge, 2001 CanLII 35569 (QC TAQ)

Date: 2001-06-05
File: SAS-M-064392-0101
Reference: D. M. v. Anna-Laberge Hospital, 2001 CanLII 35569 (QC TAQ), consulted 2015-12-222015-12-15

Social Affairs Section

As regards the protection of people whose mental state presents a danger to themselves or for others

Date: June 5th, 2001

File: SAS-M-064392-0101

Members of the Court:
Georges Wurtele, lawyer
Yolène Jumelle, social worker
Pierre Hélie, psychiatrist

D… M…






As regards the protection of people whose mental state presents a danger to themselves or to others

[1] This is a matter of a motion to lift the order against the Applicant for a closed cure on January 23rd, 2001.

[2] The Applicant disputes an order of detention issued against him on January 23rd, 2001. This order had been issued on the faith of two medical reports, one signed by Dr. St-Hilaire and the other by Dr. T. Malec.  Dr. St-Hilaire wrote in his report dated January 17th, 2001 that the Applicant presented “a paranoid delirium concerning the C.S.S.T.” and concluded as to the need for detention to treat his episode of decomposed paranoid schizophrenia. The report of Dr. Malec dated January 18th, 2001 was to the same effect.

[3] During the hearing, the Applicant testified that he had a work-related accident which broke vertebrae in his back. Since that time, he has been involved in a lawsuit with the C.S.S.T to obtain just compensation. He says he is unable to work. He needs physiotherapy and retraining, not psychiatric treatment. He affirms that his father has contempt for him and that the latter lacks objectivity. He had a dispute with his sister.

[4] He is living circumstances of rejection. He admits having been followed in psychiatry, but this is the first time that he has been hospitalized. He was treated between 1996 and 2001 by Dr. Bergeron who calmed his anxieties. He declares that he can no longer live with his father, who has kicked him out, but that he can go to live with a neighbor with whom has made arrangements.

[5] He started to take medicaton on January 23rd.

[6] The Court, having heard the testimony of the Applicant, concludes that his detention must be maintained. Indeed, the Applicant shows no self-criticism, still presents this quarrelsomeness towards the C.S.S.T and a certain aggressiveness toward his father. It is the opinion of the undersigned that it would be dangerous for his mental health or for the health of others that the order for a closed cure be lifted at present.

[7] During the hearing, the Applicant’s attorney claimed that it was up to the hospital to prove the cogency of the order against the Applicant and that in the absence of this proof, the Applicant must be released. The Court does not share this opinion. The motion to lift an order of detention presented before the Administrative Tribunal of Quebec is not an appeal against the order issued by the Judge of the Court of Quebec.

[8] In the opinion of the undersigned, it belongs to the Applicant, during a hearing on the motion to lift the order of detention issued against him, to show that his mental state no longer presents any danger either to him, or for others.

[9] For these reasons, the Court


Georges Wurtele
Yolène Jumelle
Pierre Hélie

June 5th, 2001

Maître Ian-Kristian Ladouceur
Attorney for the applicant


Random Quote

The social tyranny of extorting recantation, of ostracism and virtual outlawry as the new means of coercing the man out of line, is the negation of democracy.

— Justice Ivan Cleveland Rand of the Supreme Court of Canada, Canadian Bar Review (CBR)
The Judicial Madness Gallery
The Judicial Madness Image Gallery
"Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" — Juvénal, Satires, VI, 346.  En français : « Qui nous protègera contre ceux qui nous protègent ? »  In English: " Who will protect us from those who protect us? "

 — Mauro Cappelletti dans Louis Favoreu (dir.), Le pouvoir des juges, Paris, Economica, 1990, p. 115.
Le Spécialiste DOSSIER: Extreme Behavior
Yves-Marie Morissette's Poster Boy for 'Legalizing' Chemical Lobotomies: Valéry Fabrikant

Yves-Marie Morissette's Poster Boy for 'Legalizing' Chemical Lobotomies: Valéry Fabrikant

Judicial Madness Signature Video

Judicial Madness Signature Video & Sharing Buttons

Yves-Marie Morissette The Works The Mind
Judicial Declarations of Madness in Quebec Courts
On the “Rule of Law”
“In public regulation of this sort there is no such thing as absolute and untrammelled ‘discretion’, that is that action can be taken on any ground or for any reason that can be suggested to the mind of the administrator; no legislative Act can, without express language, be taken to contemplate an unlimited arbitrary power exercisable for any purpose, however capricious or irrelevant, regardless of the nature or purpose of the statute. Fraud and cor­ruption in the Commission may not be mentioned in such statutes but they are always implied as exceptions. ‘Discretion’ necessarily implies good faith in discharging public duty; there is always a perspective within which a statute is intended to operate; and any clear departure from its lines or objects is just as objectionable as fraud or corruption.”

— Mr. Justice Ivan Cleveland Rand writing in the most memorable passage in Roncarelli v. Duplessis, [1959] S.C.R. 121 at the Supreme Court of Canada, page 140.
Random Quote
Fears are mounting that the psychiatrist Anatoly Koryagin is near to death in the notorious jail of Christopol in central Russia. Letters that have reached the West from his wife and a friend indicate that he is so weak that unless he is given expert medical care he could die at any time. Dr. Koryagin has been in prison for the last four years for actively opposing the political abuse of psychiatry. The abuse takes the form of labeling dissidents as mad and forcibly treating them with drugs in mental hospitals.   ― Peter B. Reddaway, "The Case of Dr. Koryagin", October 10, 1985 issue of The New York Times Review of Books
"If we were lawyers, this would be billable time."
A Word on Caricature
“Humor is essential to a successful tactician, for the most potent weapons known to mankind are satire and ridicule.”

— “The Education of an Organizer”, p. 75, Rules for Radicals, A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals by Saul Alinsky, Random House, New York, 1971.

I am no fan of Saul Alinsky's whose methods are antidemocratic and unparliamentary. But since we are fighting a silent war against the subversive Left, I say, if it works for them, it will work for us. Bring on the ridicule!  And in this case, it is richly deserved by the congeries of judicial forces wearing the Tweedle suits, and by those who are accurately conducting our befuddled usurpers towards the Red Dawn.

— Admin, Judicial Madness, 22 March 2016.
Flag Counter