Search results

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT CRIMINAL CHARGE The Court finds, after reviewing the response to Docket #122, that Plaintiff (and Attorney) @MMiqa has communicated about this case with the presiding officer without making opposing counsel aware of it. The fact that the...

Discovery is now closed. We'll wait for interrogatory answers before moving on.

Granted.

Overruled as moot.

Objection sustained, however the statement will not be struck. The Bar Association of Redmont is warned against making indecorous statements, especially seeing as it is the legal entity tasked with upholding proper values in the practise of law.

Objection overruled, the statements may have come out of ignorance.

Objection overruled, as the statements may come out of ignorance. The matter is now settled by the Court: CreeperTD is not the Defendant and will not be referred to as such.

The objection was denied. We only consider responses to objections when deciding on objections. Thus, sustaining such a motion would serve no purpose. Overruled.

Sustained. When submitting interrogatories; Notably, the Defendant is not CreeperTD but rather the BAR as a distinct legal entity. @MMiqa you may rephrase if you wish.

The statement is false, however the Court is not satisfied that the Plaintiff was aware of its falsity. At most, they weren't aware of its truth. However, making a guess (a careless and unsupported guess) is not providing knowingly false testimony. As such, the motion is denied. That being...

Very well. This civil action is dismissed with prejudice.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT VERDICT Rqtting Plaintiff v. .Hannah35210 Defendant Plaintiff @Rqtting approaches this Court seeking relief for an alleged breach of contract during a sale of netherite ingots which never materialised despite the Plaintiff having made...

Noted. Keep in mind that any dismissal at this stage would be with prejudice. Attorney General @Matthew100x, do you wish to file a response to the motion?

This appeal is dismissed at the request of the Appellant.

No party is compelled to answer interrogatories that have been objected to. I will review the objections in due time. Interrogatories that haven’t been objected to must be answered within 24h (if they haven’t been answered already)

Granted.

Is there any actual risk of dispersal of funds? And, wherever possible, proof of such risk?

I am your Judge.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Background On August 23rd, Judge Superwoops sent an unprompted message containing the word "legal" in the #legal channel of the DemocracyCraft Discord server. Shortly thereafter, MMiqa, the Plaintiff in this case, replied...

Case dismissed at the request of the Plaintiff.