- Joined
- Oct 24, 2026
- Messages
- 7
- Thread Author
- #1
Case Filing
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
Lovecodeabc
Plaintiff
v.
Hhhhhhhhhhiiiiii
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES
1. Lovecodeabc, Plaintiff, proceeding pro per.
2. Hhhhhhhhhhiiiiii, Defendant.
II. FACTS
1. At or about 1:29 PM, October 30, 2026, Plaintiff Lovecodeabc was taking a stroll along public streets near Geelong. (P-001, 002).
2. Then, Defendant hhhhhhhhhhiiiiii intentionally hit the Plaintiff with their stone axe, injuring the Plaintiff. (P-001).
3. Plaintiff is and was, at all times relevant, wearing full, unenchanted diamond armor. (P-003).
4. Accordingly, according to Minecraft damage calculations, the Plaintiff incurred 1.3 hearts of damage (visually rounded to 1.5 hearts).
5. The Plaintiff did not consent to being hit.
6. The incident caused the Plaintiff fear, distress, disruption, and placed the Plaintiff in danger.
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
CLAIM 1: CIVIL DAMAGES ARISING FROM ASSAULT UNDER THE CRIMINAL CODE ACT
1. Assault is defined as:
Criminal Code Act, pt. IV, § 1.
2. The Defendant's conduct satisfies both criterions. The Defendant hit the Plaintiff, resulting in a loss of less than 3 hearts, FACTS ¶ 2-4; but those actions also placed Plaintiff in a position of danger, as his health lowered allowing Defendant to further hit Plaintiff and perhaps inflict more severe harm onto him.
3. It is well established that criminal conduct can form the basis for a civil claim. The Civil Code Act, pt. III, § 1, allows "claims for civil damages arising from criminal conduct." In megaprogram3r v. Osirisx88 [2026] DCR 57, this Court granted civil damages for an assault. See also Adamtheking05 v. Melwin20king [2026] DCR 53 (awarding damages for assault).
CLAIM 2: CIVIL DAMAGES ARISING FROM NEGLIGENCE
4. A person is negligent when that person:
Civil Code Act, pt. XII, § 3.
5. "A duty of care, as typically defined, is 1) an obligation; 2) that must be upheld; and 3) is set-out by either custom, norm, or by law. If a duty is not upheld, it is considered a breach, and the party who is obliged to uphold the duty can be liable for damages." RaiTheGuy v. Department of Commerce [2025] FCR 29. In this case, the obligation -- one to not assault people -- was clearly set out by law. In this case, the Defendant failed to uphold that obligation, and thus committed an act of negligence. As already pleaded, FACTS ¶ 2-4, that breach caused the Plaintiff harm. That harm was a clear and direct consequence of the breach.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. "Punitive damages are damages awarded against a person to punish them for their outrageous conduct.
Conduct is outrageous where [..] [t]he defendant intended to cause harm or loss; [t]he defendant acted knowing that their conduct was likely to disadvantage, harm, or seriously inconvenience another person". Civil Code Act, pt. III, § 3 (cleaned up). The Defendant's conduct falls under this category. As already pleaded, the Defendant intended to cause bodily harm and knowingly acted to do so. Accordingly, the conduct is statutorily outrageous. The Plaintiff thus requests $2,000 in punitive damages.
2. In the alternative, if the Court finds that the Plaintiff "is not entitled to any other damages", Civil Code Act, pt. III, § 4, the Plaintiff requests $1,000 in nominal damages.
3. The Plaintiff also requests legal fees as provided for in the Civil Code for pro se parties, id. at pt. III, § 7(h), in the amount of $3,000.
3. The Plaintiff also requests such other relief that the Court determines is just and proper.
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 30th day of October 2026
