Lawsuit: Dismissed Utilitysoup1407 v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2023] DCR 55

Status
Not open for further replies.
dodrio3

dodrio3

Citizen
Supporter
Willow Resident
Dodrio3
Dodrio3
donator1
Joined
May 15, 2021
Messages
192
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Utilitysoup1407 (Lovely Representing)
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: On the 4th of February, the Violent Offences Amendment Act was signed into law by President Derpy. This law stated that murder is an indictable offence. Which in the Standardized Criminal Code Act states" An Indictable Offence is a crime that needs a trial by jury."
Since this date the Plaintiff has been arrested for murder 3 times serving a total of 30 minutes in jail. Not a single one of the murder charges was taken and proven in court. For each charge, The Plaintiff was arrested and charged $100 in fines totalling $300.

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF


I. PARTIES
1. Utilitysoup1407
2. Department of Justice

II. FACTS
1. The Violent Offences Amendment Act was signed by President Derpy on February 4th.
2. It states Murder as an "Indictable Criminal Offense" meaning it has to be proven in court by jury.
3. Since that time, The Plaintiff has been charged with 3 counts of murder and fined a total of $300 Has served 30 minutes in prison.
4. All of these murder charges were never taken and proven in court

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Wrongful conviction

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $300 returned as it was fined for wrongfully convicted crimes
2. $1500 For the time the Plaintiff spent in jail $50 per minute
3. Murder Charges removed from the Plaintiffs Criminal record
4. $360In legal fees (20% of case value)

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 15 day of 12 2023
 
f5f9rlp.png


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

The Attorney General is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Utilitysoup1407 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.​
 
Your honor,

I have been assigned to represent the Commonweath in this case on behalf of the DLA.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.5 - Lack of Claim

Your honor,

According to rule 5.5 of the criteria available for a motion to dismiss, "A Motion to Dismiss may be filed for failure to state a claim for relief, or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge."

The claims for relief in this case clearly meet the last half of this sentence in which it states "or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge." The plaintiff provided no evidence that any of these arrests took place, assuming that they did actually happen, the plaintiff provided no evidence whatsoever that there was time served, that fines were ever paid, or that these arrests happened within the timeframe that this law was enacted.

The defence seeks to have this case dismissed and all prayers for relief denied.

Thank you.

DATED: This 16th day of December 2023
 
Dodrio3, you have 48 hours to respond to the motion to dismiss.
 
"Your Honour, I was waiting for the discovery phase to input all of my evidence that supports my claims as directed by court procedure. In lue of the motion to dismiss here is the evidence showing that my client was sent to jail between those date.

NOTE FROM PRESIDING MAGISTRATE: The below evidence is stricken from the record in accordance with a court order.
 

Attachments

  • image.png
    image.png
    13.4 KB · Views: 44
Last edited by a moderator:
dodrio3 said:
"Your Honour, I was waiting for the discovery phase to input all of my evidence that supports my claims as directed by court procedure. In lue of the motion to dismiss here is the evidence showing that my client was sent to jail between those date.
Click to expand...
Is this your response?
 
dodrio3 said:
"Your Honour, I was waiting for the discovery phase to input all of my evidence that supports my claims as directed by court procedure. In lue of the motion to dismiss here is the evidence showing that my client was sent to jail between those date.
Click to expand...
I have 2 objections your honor,

Objection 1 :

Breach of Procedure -

The Plaintiff's council did not respond in the proper manner, and simply made comments to the court, and did not make a proper response to the previous motion. I am requesting that this be stricken from the record.

Objection 2 :

Improper Evidence -

No where on the "evidence" provided does this show that this is the criminal record for the Plaintiff. The screenshot has clearly been cropped before uploaded and could be the criminal record for any player as far as we know.
 
I will sustain both objections, the objected-to statement is hereby struck from the record. The evidence in that statement is also stricken from the record on the grounds that it “may be modified.” Dodrio3, if you are to respond, please do it in an appropriate format that makes the point of the statement known.
 
Reponses to motion to dismiss

Your Honour, I was waiting for the discovery phase to input all of my evidence that supports my claims as directed by court procedure.
 
As an extra note the case needs to be marked as in session your Honour.
 
dodrio3 said:
As an extra note the case needs to be marked as in session your Honour.
Click to expand...
I will mark it of my own accord. Do not speak out of turn.
 
I will be away with severely reduced activity from tomorrow to December 28th. Are both parties fine with the court going into recess until the 28th?
 
That will be fine with me. Enjoy the Holidays!
 
Yes your Honour,

Have a merry Christmas
 
Thank you all. Court is hereby in recess. Happy holidays!
 
We will now move onto discovery for the next 7 days. Court is hereby out of recess.
 
Your Honor,

If I may, it does not seem as though there has been a decision made by the court on the previous motion to dismiss. The Objections were sustained to the response to the motion, yet the Courts never made a decision on the Motion to Dismiss.
 
MrFluffy2U94 said:
Your Honor,

If I may, it does not seem as though there has been a decision made by the court on the previous motion to dismiss. The Objections were sustained to the response to the motion, yet the Courts never made a decision on the Motion to Dismiss.
Click to expand...
My apology, I will deliberate on it now.
 
Your honor,

Are we nearing a verdict on this motion?
 
Another lawyer at lovely will be taking over this case
 
MrFluffy2U94 said:
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

Rule 5.5 - Lack of Claim

Your honor,

According to rule 5.5 of the criteria available for a motion to dismiss, "A Motion to Dismiss may be filed for failure to state a claim for relief, or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge."

The claims for relief in this case clearly meet the last half of this sentence in which it states "or against a claim for relief that has insufficient evidence to support the civil or criminal charge." The plaintiff provided no evidence that any of these arrests took place, assuming that they did actually happen, the plaintiff provided no evidence whatsoever that there was time served, that fines were ever paid, or that these arrests happened within the timeframe that this law was enacted.

The defence seeks to have this case dismissed and all prayers for relief denied.

Thank you.

DATED: This 16th day of December 2023
Click to expand...
The motion to dismiss is rejected. Evidence is to be presented in the discovery phase of trial, which we will now move onto for 7 days. I ask both parties, at minimum, to present a list of witnesses.
 
Your Honor,

Pardon the interruption but I will be the Lovely Law lawyer taking over as Lead counsel.

Thank you.
 
Your honor,

A criminal case has recently been filed against the defendant in order to indict them for these exact crimes in The Commonwealth v. UtilitySoup1407 in this District Court. A link has been attached below.

The Commonwealth of Redmont v. UtilitySoup1407

I would like to request that this case be out in recess until there is a verdict for this criminal case, as that will obviously be a key component to any judgements in this case.
 
OBJECTION
Breach of procedure

The defense has spoken out of turn the plaintiff would like to motion to strike the defense statement.
 
PoetRini said:
OBJECTION
Breach of procedure

The defense has spoken out of turn the plaintiff would like to motion to strike the defense statement.
Click to expand...
Overruled, the defense's statement is indeed something worth noting.
 
We will now enter discovery for 7 days. I ask each party at least present a list of witnesses.
 
Your honor,

The defense has no witness that we would like to call upon at this time.
 
MOTION TO DISMISS
Lack of Claim

Your honor,

I wanted to bring to your attention the recent bill that was passed. Murder Quick Fix v2 Act. This bill states that Ex-post Facto will not apply to the misclassification of Murder from a criminal offense to a summary offense. This act clears the government of any wrong doing, and allows those parties to open a DLA support ticket to be reimbursed for their fines.

I have attached a link to this bill that was enacted by the President yesterday for your convenience.

Act of Congress - Murder Quick Fix v2 Act

House: 6-2-0 Senate: 5-0-0 A BILL To Waive Liability of the Government The people of Democracy Craft, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law...
www.democracycraft.net www.democracycraft.net

Thank you for your time and professionalism in this case.
 
MrFluffy2U94 said:
MOTION TO DISMISS
Lack of Claim

Your honor,

I wanted to bring to your attention the recent bill that was passed. Murder Quick Fix v2 Act. This bill states that Ex-post Facto will not apply to the misclassification of Murder from a criminal offense to a summary offense. This act clears the government of any wrong doing, and allows those parties to open a DLA support ticket to be reimbursed for their fines.

I have attached a link to this bill that was enacted by the President yesterday for your convenience.

Act of Congress - Murder Quick Fix v2 Act

House: 6-2-0 Senate: 5-0-0 A BILL To Waive Liability of the Government The people of Democracy Craft, through their elected Representatives in the Congress and the force of law ordained to that Congress by the people through the constitution, do hereby enact the following provisions into law...
www.democracycraft.net www.democracycraft.net

Thank you for your time and professionalism in this case.
Click to expand...
This case is hereby dismissed, I thank all parties for their time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top