Apologies, Your Honor, there was some confusion on the deadline. We hope that the Court will accept the following:
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Response to Motion to Dismiss
The defense in their motion to dismiss argues that “Merely alleging that a law is...
Your honor, the Commonwealth is present and does not oppose.
We do request that the Plaintiffs and their Counsel be issued a warning on filing inaccurate and potentially frivolous cases in the future.
I'm not sure what the formal motion on this would be, so I apologize for this.
The Commonwealth requests that the Court acknowledge P-049 as non-existent, and that any argument made that relies on P-049 be treated as unsupported.
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
INTRODUCTION OF EVIDENCE, WITNESS LIST, and TRIAL
The Commonwealth introduces the following into evidence:
This is a record of licences and qualifications that the Plaintiff has.
This is a record of the Firearms License given to the...
Your honor, the Plaintiff is trying to have their cake and eat it. Fact 4 states:
The interrogatory does not ask who or how the Plaintiff voted for. It asks only whether the Plaintiff accessed the voting process after gaining access to the commands allowing them to be 5.4 blocks tall.
The...
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO COMPEL
The Commonwealth wishes to compel the Plaintiff to produce P-045 and P-049 to the court. The Plaintiff has listed it in their Complaint, but it has not been attached.
Interrogatories for the Plaintiff:
Per Rule 4.8, the Defence has the following interrogatories for the Plaintiff.
Since gaining access to the command allowing you to appear 5.4 blocks tall, have you voted in any election?
Since gaining access to the command allows you to appear 5.4 blocks...
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CORRECTED MOTION TO DISMISS
The Commonwealth respectfully files this Corrected Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 5.5 and Rule 5.10 of the Court Rules and Procedures.
The Defence moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, deemed...
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
Ko531
Plaintiff
v.
The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. DENY.
2. AFFIRM. Noting this is only for gimmicks and not functional.
3. DENY.
4. DENY.
5. DENY.
6. DENY.
7. DENY.
8. DENY.
9. DENY.
10...
Username: ameslap
Owner: Beacon Health
Billable Player: Ameslap or DB: Beacon-Health
Discord Username: ameslap
Application Date: May 8, 2026
Plot: cbd048
Responsible Pharmacist: ameslap
Agreement:
I have read and understand all relevant policies from the Department of...
Client Name: Ameslap
Counsel Name: Ameslap (self-representing)
Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Plaintiff
Reason for Appeal:
The Federal Court erred in dismissing [2026] FCR 26 for lack of standing by applying an overly narrow definition of injury. The Court concluded that no...
Your Honor,
The Plaintiff is not making a perjury allegation at this time, and that is not the purpose of the request.
I am simply asking to bring to the Court's attention evidence that directly contradicts the Commonwealth's factual assertion that the treaty was not signed. This issue is...
Your honor @ko531, may I submit evidence of the claims that I have made in relation to point III, which emphasizes that the government has made a false assertion that the treaty was not signed? I have multiple records proving the opposite.
I'm happy to do this in a sidebar or here in open...
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS
The Plaintiff opposes the Commonwealth's Motion to Dismiss. The Motion misstates both the nature of the Plaintiff's injury and the nature of the Plaintiff's claim. This case is not about whether the treaty has...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.