Lawsuit: In Session StarKlower v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2026] FCR 73

[eviltom_]

Case Filing

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

StarKlower
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant


COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

-----

On the 4th of June 2026, at around 10:36 PM Eastern Time [5th of June 2:36 AM GMT or Server Time] I was walking outside of the bank area, around the nearby bushes that have iron bars on the outside. I fell into a spot I realized was impossible to get out of, so I ran the command /stuck, because it was convenient for me to stay in the general area. The /stuck command had teleported me to an area beneath the bank, but not within its vault. No teleportation-related commands had worked and I was unable to starve myself to die within this area, so I had been stuck there for close to 1 hour and 13 minutes [until 5th of June 1:49 AM GMT or Server Time], before I was extracted from the area by a member of the staff (Neemfy Gould).

The Commonwealth of Redmont has been negligent in its duty to provide safe infrastructure by not filling the area beneath the bank's vault in so that the /stuck command would not consider it a safe area for me to be teleported to with no way to leave it on my own. I believe this action has been negligent and dangerous and constitutes deprivation of liberty.

-----

I. PARTIES

1. StarKlower (Plaintiff)
2. Commonwealth of Redmont (Defendant)

II. FACTS

1. On the 5th of June around 2:36 AM GMT or Server Time, the plaintiff had ended up in an inescapable area near the bushes outside the Reville Bank(P-001, P-002)
2. Directly after realizing the above fact, they have ran the `/stuck` command, as they have intended to remain in the general area. (P-001)
3. The plaintiff had been teleported to an area beneath the bank vault as a result of the command. (P-001, P-003)
4. There is no way to leave this area without using some teleportation-related command as a result of there being no accessible way to leave it via walking or flight or breaking blocks and no way to starve yourself to death. (P-001, P-004)
5. The teleportation-related commands cannot be used in this area. (P-001)
6. On the 5th of June around 3:49 AM GMT or Server Time the plaintiff had been extracted from the area by a member of the staff, Neemfy Gould. (P-001)

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. Deprivation of Liberty
The Defendant's actions violated the Plaintiff's constitutional rights. Section 35(14) of the Constitution states:
-----
"Every citizen has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."
-----

The Commonwealth of Redmont's negligent actions have deprived the plaintiff of their right to liberty through unlawful confinement with no means of exit.


2. Negligence
The Defendant's actions have resulted in a civil violation. The Civil Code Act, part XII, section 3 states:
-----
3. Negligence (General)
[...]
A person commits a violation if the person:
(a) owes a duty of care to the plaintiff; and
(b) breaches that duty through careless action or omission; and
(c) the breach causes harm to the plaintiff; and
(d) the harm was a foreseeable consequence of the breach.
-----

We believe that the Defendant's actions have resulted in this civil violation, as:
(a) the Commonwealth of Redmont has a duty to create government infrastructure such that it does not restrict the right to liberty, which arises out of a combination of two duties:
(1) to create government infrastructure (outlined in Section 11(1)(a) of the Executive Standards Act)
(2) to not restrict the right to liberty (outlined in section 35(14) of the Constitution)
(b) that duty has been breached by the careless act of creating inescapable areas both above and in the unfinished and unfilled area beneath the vault not considering the possibility of /stuck confining the defendant within
(c) the breach has caused harm by deprivation of liberty
(d) the harm was a foreseeable consequence, as the functionality of the /stuck command is generally understood


IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Plaintiff seeks the following from this Court:

1. 3650$ in Compensatory Damages under part III, section 2 of the Redmont Civil Code Act for negligence to compensate for the time the plaintiff had been confined in the area beneath the bank vault. Since there is no fixed remedy ascribed to negligence in the Civil Code Act, this request is based upon the amount of damages that would be granted by a wrongful arrest as outlined in Criminal Code Act, part I, section 6(1)(c) occurring for 73 minutes, as the deprivation of liberty is similar to that of caused by a wrongful arrest.

2. 3650$ in Punitive Damages under part III, section 3 of the Redmont Civil Code Act for negligence to discourage such conduct in the future. Since there is no fixed remedy ascribed to negligence in the Redmont Civil Code Act, this request is based upon the belief that a similar amount to that of the compensatory damages would be just given the nature and extent of the act.

3. 30% legal fees or $3000 minimum as provided under part III, section 7 of the Redmont Civil Code Act.

V. WITNESSES

1. Fishmaster909
2. Ziggy__134


VI. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001 - latest.logs of the incident following the use of /stuck

[22:36:39] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Searching for a safe location...
[22:36:41] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] There you go! You've been teleported to a safe location.
[22:39:00] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » help im under the bank but like not the maze part the empty space part?????
[22:39:36] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't use /stuck here.
[22:39:45] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » im stuck
[22:39:46] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Are you trapped in someone's land claim? Try the /trapped command.
[22:39:53] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't use /trapped here.
[22:40:23] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » lmao /stuck sent me here and wont let me back out
[22:40:23] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Are you trapped in someone's land claim? Try the /trapped command.
[22:40:28] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | [Staff] [Sen.] Dep. Senate President True Darklander » don't forget to /sethome
[22:40:48] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » im in the backrooms
[22:41:35] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » i got a /home i just got sent here lmao
[22:41:57] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't use /stuck here.
[22:42:01] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't use /spawn here.
[22:42:05] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't use /home here.
[22:42:07] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » wait
[22:42:14] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » im actually stuck
[22:42:14] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Are you trapped in someone's land claim? Try the /trapped command.
[22:42:26] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » i cant /spawn or /home
[22:42:52] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't use /ticket here.
[22:42:59] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » hey darklander
[22:43:09] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | [Staff] [Sen.] Dep. Senate President True Darklander » yea?
[22:43:46] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » i cant /ticket
[22:43:55] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | [Staff] [Sen.] Dep. Senate President True Darklander » bruh
[22:44:28] [Render thread/INFO]: Connecting to play.democracycraft.net, 25565
[22:44:33] [Render thread/INFO]: Stopping!

[22:46:55] [Render thread/INFO]: Setting user: StarKlower
[22:47:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Nice to see you StarKlower!
[22:47:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] [+] StarKlower
[22:48:13] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] INTL | StarKlower » sorry darklander i timed out
[22:48:43] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] INTL | StarKlower » and now ive been banished to the uk
[22:51:49] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Nice to see you StarKlower!

[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] DemocracyCraft
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Nice to see you StarKlower!
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] There are 163 players online.
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT]
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Website: www.democracycraft.net
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Discord: discord.gg/democracy
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Check out /links for important info
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT]
[23:32:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] [+] StarKlower

[23:32:58] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:33:35] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] L | Designer Star Klower » how long does it take to die from starvation
[23:33:35] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] CHAT » No one can hear you...
[23:33:38] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] You are now messaging general
[23:33:50] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » how long does it take to die from starvation
[23:35:10] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:35:11] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:35:11] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:35:12] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:35:12] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:35:13] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:35:14] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:35:20] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:18] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:18] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:19] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:20] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:21] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:21] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:22] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:23] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:23] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:24] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:25] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:25] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:26] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:27] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:27] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:29] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:32] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:33] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:34] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:34] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:35] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:36] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:37] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:37] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:38] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:38] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:39] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:40] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:41] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:42] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:42] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:43] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:44] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:45] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:45] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:47] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:47] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:48] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:49] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:49] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:50] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:50] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:54] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:55] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:36:55] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:37:28] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » is there a way to climb walls with ghost blocks?
[23:37:36] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:05] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » is there a way to climb walls with ghost blocks? if so, how?
[23:38:32] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:33] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:34] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:35] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:36] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:37] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:39] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:39] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:40] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:41] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:42] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:43] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:38:45] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Hey! Sorry, but you can't break that block here.
[23:40:18] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » yay im finally dying
[23:40:24] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » im almost free
[23:42:04] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » ...we cant actually die from starvation here, can we?
[23:42:14] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Brewer TripRod14 » nope
[23:42:19] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Brewer Insert_Usernames » oh nah
[23:42:48] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » i guess im just trapped until a mod can help me
[23:42:49] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Are you trapped in someone's land claim? Try the /trapped command.
[23:44:13] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » hoping a mod can see my ticket on discord bc thats the only way i can get help
[23:47:39] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » how long does it take to typically answer a ticket on discord?
[23:48:40] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » thank you so much!!!!!!!!
[23:48:40] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] L | [Staff] Miner Neemfy Gould » be more careful >
[23:48:55] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » it was /stuck not me
[23:48:56] [Render thread/INFO]: [System] [CHAT] Are you trapped in someone's land claim? Try the /trapped command.
[23:49:12] [Render thread/INFO]: [CHAT] G | Designer Star Klower » finally free

Spoiler: P-002 - Reproduction Photo of the original inescapable location above the vault

Spoiler: P-003 - Photo of Plaintiff’s perspective of the unfinished area beneath the bank

Spoiler: P-004 - Photo of server messages showing that breaking blocks is not possible

Spoiler: Proof of representation

By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 13th day of July 2026

 

[Dartanboy]

Writ of Summons

Attorney General @zLost (or another individual legally authorized to represent the Commonwealth) is hereby summoned to the District Court in the case of StarKlower v. Commonwealth of Redmont.

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.

 

[juniperfig]

Hello, Attorney General Juniperfig here with a settlement offer.

I will give everyone in this case (lawyers, parties, judges) $2,500 each if you drop this case with prejudice.

Thank you for your time.

 

[Dartanboy]

Hello, Attorney General Juniperfig here with a settlement offer.

I will give everyone in this case (lawyers, parties, judges) $2,500 each if you drop this case with prejudice.

Thank you for your time.

The courtroom is not the place for settlement negotiations. You are warned that further actions like this will result in Contempt of Court charges.

 

[Superwoops]

I'll be taking over.

Acting Attorney General @Matthew100x, or his authorised subordinate, must present an answer to complaint within 48 hours.

 

[Matthew100x]

I am filing a notice of appearance on the behalf of the Commonwealth of Redmont.

 

[Matthew100x]

I know I late for this response. May I please have an extension for this answer?

 

[Matthew100x]

Answer to Complaint

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

StarKlower
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. Defendant DENIES that on the 5th of June around 2:36 AM GMT or Server Time, the plaintiff had ended up in an inescapable area near the bushes outside the Reville Bank because the evidence used is impermissible text logs under Supreme Court precedent (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).
2. Defendant AFFIRMS that Plaintiff ran the `/stuck` command, as they have intended to remain in the general area.
3. Defendant AFFIRMS that Plaintiff leported to an area beneath the bank vault as a result of the command.
4. Defendant AFFIRMS there is no way to leave this area without using some teleportation-related command as a result of there being no accessible way to leave it via walking or flight or breaking blocks and no way to starve yourself to death.
5. Defendant DENIES that the teleportation-related commands cannot be used in this area because the evidence used is impermissible text logs under Supreme Court precedent (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).
6. Defendant DENIES that on the 5th of June around 3:49 AM GMT or Server Time the plaintiff had been extracted from the area by a member of the staff, Neemfy Gould.

II. DEFENCES
1. This is a Staff Issue
The alleged confinement was directly produced by the operation of the /stuck command and the restrictions allegedly imposed upon other teleportation-related commands. Those commands and restrictions are server-plugin functions administered by DemocracyCraft staff rather than governmental powers exercised by the Commonwealth.

The Federal Court dismissed a claim concerning jail-plugin configuration because the configuration was controlled by server staff rather than the government (see Matthew100x v. The Government of D.C. [2020] FCR 23, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/matthew100x-v-the-government-of-d-c-2020-fcr-23.1632/#post-4282).

The Supreme Court has also recognized that staff rules and corresponding actions are actioned, ordered, and mandated by staff, while courts may consider staff intent when determining the legal consequences that follow from those actions (see Q.C. [2026] FCR 52 | [2026] SCR 14).

To the extent Plaintiff’s alleged injury resulted from the configuration, routing, or restriction of server commands, that conduct is not attributable to the Commonwealth absent evidence that the Commonwealth controlled, configured, directed, or ordered the relevant plugin functions.

2. Non-Admissible Text-Log Evidence does not Fulfill Plaintiff’s Burden of Proof
Plaintiff bears the burden of proving the claims on a balance of probabilities (see Part II, §§ 2(1)(a) and 3(1)(a), Act of Congress - Judicial Standards Act). Plaintiff must therefore prove every element of the alleged constitutional violation and negligence claim through admissible evidence.

P-001 is an editable text log. Court Rule 4.6 provides that editable text logs are inadmissible without corroboration from a secondary source (see Rule 4.6, Information - Court Rules and Procedures). The Supreme Court has similarly held that text logs are inherently suspect and must be corroborated (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).

Without admissible corroboration of P-001, Plaintiff cannot establish that teleportation-related commands were unavailable, that Plaintiff remained in the location for approximately seventy-three minutes, or that a staff member ultimately extracted Plaintiff.

3. Lack of Original Jurisdiction Over the Constitutional Claim
Plaintiff’s first claim expressly asks the Court to determine whether the Commonwealth violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right to liberty under Part V, § 35(14) of the Constitution.

The Constitution specifically places original jurisdiction over questions of constitutionality in the Federal Court (see Part II, § 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/). Although the District Court possesses original jurisdiction over minor civil cases valued at no more than $120,000, the Constitution separately and specifically assigns questions of constitutionality to the Federal Court (see Part II, §§ 16(1)(e) and 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/).

Accordingly, the District Court lacks original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s first claim, and that claim should be dismissed under Court Rule 5.4 without prejudice to its filing in the proper court (see Rule 5.4, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/). Which we argue in our motion to dismiss below.

By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 1st day of August, 2026.

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

StarKlower
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

StarKlower v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2026] DCR 126

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Your Honour,

The Defendant, the Commonwealth of Redmont, through the Acting Attorney General, respectfully moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims and corresponding prayers for relief pursuant to Court Rules 5.4.

Court Rule 5.4 authorizes dismissal where a case or claim was filed in a court that lacks original jurisdiction. A motion may be directed against individual claims and prayers for relief (see Rules 5.1, 5.3, and 5.4,, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/).

I. CLAIM I SHOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE THE DISTRICT COURT LACKS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER QUESTIONS OF CONSTITUTIONALITY

Plaintiff’s first claim alleges that Defendant violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right to liberty under Part V, § 35(14) of the Constitution. Plaintiff is therefore asking this Court to determine whether the Commonwealth’s alleged conduct violated the Constitution.

The Constitution specifically grants the Federal Court original jurisdiction over questions of constitutionality (see Part II, § 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/).

Although the District Court possesses jurisdiction over minor civil cases valued at no more than $120,000, questions of constitutionality are separately and specifically assigned to the Federal Court (see Part II, §§ 16(1)(e) and 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/). The specific constitutional assignment of jurisdiction controls over the District Court’s general monetary jurisdiction.

Because Claim I presents a question of constitutionality, it was filed in the incorrect court and should be dismissed under Court Rule 5.4 without prejudice to its filing in the Federal Court (see Rule 5.4, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/).

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court:

1. Dismiss Claim I, under Court Rule 5.4, without prejudice to its filing in the Federal Court;

By making this submission, I agree that I understand the penalties for lying in court and that I am subject to perjury if I knowingly make a false statement before the Court.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew100x
Acting Attorney General
Counsel for the Commonwealth of Redmont

DATED: This 1st day of August, 2026.

 

[Superwoops]

I know I late for this response. May I please have an extension for this answer?

Extension approved post-hoc, please don't let it happen again.

 

[Superwoops]

Answer to Complaint

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

StarKlower
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. Defendant DENIES that on the 5th of June around 2:36 AM GMT or Server Time, the plaintiff had ended up in an inescapable area near the bushes outside the Reville Bank because the evidence used is impermissible text logs under Supreme Court precedent (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).
2. Defendant AFFIRMS that Plaintiff ran the `/stuck` command, as they have intended to remain in the general area.
3. Defendant AFFIRMS that Plaintiff leported to an area beneath the bank vault as a result of the command.
4. Defendant AFFIRMS there is no way to leave this area without using some teleportation-related command as a result of there being no accessible way to leave it via walking or flight or breaking blocks and no way to starve yourself to death.
5. Defendant DENIES that the teleportation-related commands cannot be used in this area because the evidence used is impermissible text logs under Supreme Court precedent (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).
6. Defendant DENIES that on the 5th of June around 3:49 AM GMT or Server Time the plaintiff had been extracted from the area by a member of the staff, Neemfy Gould.

II. DEFENCES
1. This is a Staff Issue
The alleged confinement was directly produced by the operation of the /stuck command and the restrictions allegedly imposed upon other teleportation-related commands. Those commands and restrictions are server-plugin functions administered by DemocracyCraft staff rather than governmental powers exercised by the Commonwealth.

The Federal Court dismissed a claim concerning jail-plugin configuration because the configuration was controlled by server staff rather than the government (see Matthew100x v. The Government of D.C. [2020] FCR 23, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/matthew100x-v-the-government-of-d-c-2020-fcr-23.1632/#post-4282).

The Supreme Court has also recognized that staff rules and corresponding actions are actioned, ordered, and mandated by staff, while courts may consider staff intent when determining the legal consequences that follow from those actions (see Q.C. [2026] FCR 52 | [2026] SCR 14).

To the extent Plaintiff’s alleged injury resulted from the configuration, routing, or restriction of server commands, that conduct is not attributable to the Commonwealth absent evidence that the Commonwealth controlled, configured, directed, or ordered the relevant plugin functions.

2. Non-Admissible Text-Log Evidence does not Fulfill Plaintiff’s Burden of Proof
Plaintiff bears the burden of proving the claims on a balance of probabilities (see Part II, §§ 2(1)(a) and 3(1)(a), Act of Congress - Judicial Standards Act). Plaintiff must therefore prove every element of the alleged constitutional violation and negligence claim through admissible evidence.

P-001 is an editable text log. Court Rule 4.6 provides that editable text logs are inadmissible without corroboration from a secondary source (see Rule 4.6, Information - Court Rules and Procedures). The Supreme Court has similarly held that text logs are inherently suspect and must be corroborated (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).

Without admissible corroboration of P-001, Plaintiff cannot establish that teleportation-related commands were unavailable, that Plaintiff remained in the location for approximately seventy-three minutes, or that a staff member ultimately extracted Plaintiff.

3. Lack of Original Jurisdiction Over the Constitutional Claim
Plaintiff’s first claim expressly asks the Court to determine whether the Commonwealth violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right to liberty under Part V, § 35(14) of the Constitution.

The Constitution specifically places original jurisdiction over questions of constitutionality in the Federal Court (see Part II, § 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/). Although the District Court possesses original jurisdiction over minor civil cases valued at no more than $120,000, the Constitution separately and specifically assigns questions of constitutionality to the Federal Court (see Part II, §§ 16(1)(e) and 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/).

Accordingly, the District Court lacks original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s first claim, and that claim should be dismissed under Court Rule 5.4 without prejudice to its filing in the proper court (see Rule 5.4, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/). Which we argue in our motion to dismiss below.

By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 1st day of August, 2026.

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

StarKlower
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

StarKlower v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2026] DCR 126

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Your Honour,

The Defendant, the Commonwealth of Redmont, through the Acting Attorney General, respectfully moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims and corresponding prayers for relief pursuant to Court Rules 5.4.

Court Rule 5.4 authorizes dismissal where a case or claim was filed in a court that lacks original jurisdiction. A motion may be directed against individual claims and prayers for relief (see Rules 5.1, 5.3, and 5.4,, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/).

I. CLAIM I SHOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE THE DISTRICT COURT LACKS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER QUESTIONS OF CONSTITUTIONALITY

Plaintiff’s first claim alleges that Defendant violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right to liberty under Part V, § 35(14) of the Constitution. Plaintiff is therefore asking this Court to determine whether the Commonwealth’s alleged conduct violated the Constitution.

The Constitution specifically grants the Federal Court original jurisdiction over questions of constitutionality (see Part II, § 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/).

Although the District Court possesses jurisdiction over minor civil cases valued at no more than $120,000, questions of constitutionality are separately and specifically assigned to the Federal Court (see Part II, §§ 16(1)(e) and 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/). The specific constitutional assignment of jurisdiction controls over the District Court’s general monetary jurisdiction.

Because Claim I presents a question of constitutionality, it was filed in the incorrect court and should be dismissed under Court Rule 5.4 without prejudice to its filing in the Federal Court (see Rule 5.4, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/).

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court:

1. Dismiss Claim I, under Court Rule 5.4, without prejudice to its filing in the Federal Court;

By making this submission, I agree that I understand the penalties for lying in court and that I am subject to perjury if I knowingly make a false statement before the Court.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew100x
Acting Attorney General
Counsel for the Commonwealth of Redmont

DATED: This 1st day of August, 2026.

Please amend your filing to comply with Rule 3.2 of the Information - Court Rules and Procedures.

 

[Superwoops]

Answer to Complaint

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

StarKlower
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. Defendant DENIES that on the 5th of June around 2:36 AM GMT or Server Time, the plaintiff had ended up in an inescapable area near the bushes outside the Reville Bank because the evidence used is impermissible text logs under Supreme Court precedent (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).
2. Defendant AFFIRMS that Plaintiff ran the `/stuck` command, as they have intended to remain in the general area.
3. Defendant AFFIRMS that Plaintiff leported to an area beneath the bank vault as a result of the command.
4. Defendant AFFIRMS there is no way to leave this area without using some teleportation-related command as a result of there being no accessible way to leave it via walking or flight or breaking blocks and no way to starve yourself to death.
5. Defendant DENIES that the teleportation-related commands cannot be used in this area because the evidence used is impermissible text logs under Supreme Court precedent (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).
6. Defendant DENIES that on the 5th of June around 3:49 AM GMT or Server Time the plaintiff had been extracted from the area by a member of the staff, Neemfy Gould.

II. DEFENCES
1. This is a Staff Issue
The alleged confinement was directly produced by the operation of the /stuck command and the restrictions allegedly imposed upon other teleportation-related commands. Those commands and restrictions are server-plugin functions administered by DemocracyCraft staff rather than governmental powers exercised by the Commonwealth.

The Federal Court dismissed a claim concerning jail-plugin configuration because the configuration was controlled by server staff rather than the government (see Matthew100x v. The Government of D.C. [2020] FCR 23, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/matthew100x-v-the-government-of-d-c-2020-fcr-23.1632/#post-4282).

The Supreme Court has also recognized that staff rules and corresponding actions are actioned, ordered, and mandated by staff, while courts may consider staff intent when determining the legal consequences that follow from those actions (see Q.C. [2026] FCR 52 | [2026] SCR 14).

To the extent Plaintiff’s alleged injury resulted from the configuration, routing, or restriction of server commands, that conduct is not attributable to the Commonwealth absent evidence that the Commonwealth controlled, configured, directed, or ordered the relevant plugin functions.

2. Non-Admissible Text-Log Evidence does not Fulfill Plaintiff’s Burden of Proof
Plaintiff bears the burden of proving the claims on a balance of probabilities (see Part II, §§ 2(1)(a) and 3(1)(a), Act of Congress - Judicial Standards Act). Plaintiff must therefore prove every element of the alleged constitutional violation and negligence claim through admissible evidence.

P-001 is an editable text log. Court Rule 4.6 provides that editable text logs are inadmissible without corroboration from a secondary source (see Rule 4.6, Information - Court Rules and Procedures). The Supreme Court has similarly held that text logs are inherently suspect and must be corroborated (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - Commonwealth of Redmont v. ImzaKRD [2025] SCR 20).

Without admissible corroboration of P-001, Plaintiff cannot establish that teleportation-related commands were unavailable, that Plaintiff remained in the location for approximately seventy-three minutes, or that a staff member ultimately extracted Plaintiff.

3. Lack of Original Jurisdiction Over the Constitutional Claim
Plaintiff’s first claim expressly asks the Court to determine whether the Commonwealth violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right to liberty under Part V, § 35(14) of the Constitution.

The Constitution specifically places original jurisdiction over questions of constitutionality in the Federal Court (see Part II, § 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/). Although the District Court possesses original jurisdiction over minor civil cases valued at no more than $120,000, the Constitution separately and specifically assigns questions of constitutionality to the Federal Court (see Part II, §§ 16(1)(e) and 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/).

Accordingly, the District Court lacks original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s first claim, and that claim should be dismissed under Court Rule 5.4 without prejudice to its filing in the proper court (see Rule 5.4, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/). Which we argue in our motion to dismiss below.

By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 1st day of August, 2026.

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

StarKlower
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

StarKlower v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2026] DCR 126

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Your Honour,

The Defendant, the Commonwealth of Redmont, through the Acting Attorney General, respectfully moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims and corresponding prayers for relief pursuant to Court Rules 5.4.

Court Rule 5.4 authorizes dismissal where a case or claim was filed in a court that lacks original jurisdiction. A motion may be directed against individual claims and prayers for relief (see Rules 5.1, 5.3, and 5.4,, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/).

I. CLAIM I SHOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE THE DISTRICT COURT LACKS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER QUESTIONS OF CONSTITUTIONALITY

Plaintiff’s first claim alleges that Defendant violated Plaintiff’s constitutional right to liberty under Part V, § 35(14) of the Constitution. Plaintiff is therefore asking this Court to determine whether the Commonwealth’s alleged conduct violated the Constitution.

The Constitution specifically grants the Federal Court original jurisdiction over questions of constitutionality (see Part II, § 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/).

Although the District Court possesses jurisdiction over minor civil cases valued at no more than $120,000, questions of constitutionality are separately and specifically assigned to the Federal Court (see Part II, §§ 16(1)(e) and 18(1)(a), https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/constitution.6/). The specific constitutional assignment of jurisdiction controls over the District Court’s general monetary jurisdiction.

Because Claim I presents a question of constitutionality, it was filed in the incorrect court and should be dismissed under Court Rule 5.4 without prejudice to its filing in the Federal Court (see Rule 5.4, https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/court-rules-and-procedures.118/).

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court:

1. Dismiss Claim I, under Court Rule 5.4, without prejudice to its filing in the Federal Court;

By making this submission, I agree that I understand the penalties for lying in court and that I am subject to perjury if I knowingly make a false statement before the Court.

Respectfully submitted,

Matthew100x
Acting Attorney General
Counsel for the Commonwealth of Redmont

DATED: This 1st day of August, 2026.

Before moving on, Plaintiff's counsel shall have 48 hours from this post to respond to the motion to dismiss.
cc: @eviltom_

 

[Matthew100x]

Please amend your filing to comply with Rule 3.2 of the Information - Court Rules and Procedures.

Edits have been made to color-code and bold the affirmations and denials. I reviewed the rule and believe that the answer otherwise complies with Rule 3.2.

 

[eviltom_]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS

Your Honor, The Plaintiff respectfully requests you remand this case to the Federal Court.

 

[Superwoops]

Case is remanded to the Federal Court.
It has been renamed accordingly.

Motion to dismiss is therefore denied.

 

[Superwoops]

I will remain your PO.
Discovery is now open and shall remain open for 5 days. Remember that parties may agree to end Discovery early.