Search results

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT VERDICT The_Donuticus v. GER, as an Organization, et al. [2022] SCR 18 I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION 1. The plaintiff had intentions to recreate MINT. 2. During the time between the initial party registration application and the ultimate shutdown of...

The Supreme Court has come to the conclusion that the plantiff has no intention of fighting this case due to the frolonged delay in any manner of engagement, having made their last statement nearly a month ago. Therefore the Supreme Court hereby dismisses Case SCR- 23 poemhunter v. The...

The Court hereby calls upon the plantiff to deliver their closing statement to the Court within the next 48 hours.

I'd like to apologize for the delays; due to real life circumstances I had a severe backlog of work due to other circumstances I explained earlier - I have nothing but free time up until the 15th of Janaury now and I see no reason to further delay this case. Rejected.

Denied, the Defense already had the oppurtunity to call witnesses before this court and failed to act upon it.

Objection (1) Perjury: The Court hereby sustains this objection, It is clear witness/co-counsel xEndeavour deleted a statement from the court thread without asking the presiding judge permission to do so - this caused undue confusion to his own representation, the defense and the court at...

Denied, due to the timeframe elapsing already.

So are you withdrawing your wish to self represent? , or are you serving as co-counsel? This is getting rather confusing with the constant lawyer switches and primary and secondary counsels

Very well, The Defence may present a list of questions to witness xEndeavour within the next 24 hours. The Plantiffs timeframe in which they must deliver their closing statement can be disregarded until called upon again.

The Court would never attempt to deprive a citizen of their right to representation in Court; however the defendant Has indicated they wish to defend themselves - therefore you are no longer the primary attorney representing the defence and as such the Court asks that the primary attorney speak...

1. This is similar to the original motions to dismiss presented earlier by the defendant. The motion to dismiss doesn't highlight how this case is moot. 2. The Supreme Court is empowered to hear any case brought before it and the court has determined that this is a case it wishes to hear. 3...

The Defendant indicated to the court that he’d be resuming self representation before deleting the message, that is what the plaintiff is referring too.

The Supreme Court is no place for jokes, if you are not the primary counsel on this case I ask you refrain from speaking unless the Defendant be unable to speak for themselves. I’d also ask you provide proof the defendant wishes to keep you on as co-counsel Overruled, The Courts Opinion does...

The Supreme Court calls upon the planting to deliver their opening statement within the next 48 hours. I’d like to personally apologize for the delay in court proceedings I was unavailable largely this week due to real life issues

Denied, I’d like to apologize to both parties for the delay on my behalf I just spent the week in hospital was discharged today, so although I acknowledge the delayed interaction from myself, I will be able to carry out my duties as normal from now on therefore I see no reason to recuse myself...

Sustained, The witness may answer questioning as they see fit however I ask that the witness be transparent and answer the questions directly.

The Plantiff may present a list of questions to the Witness within 24 hours.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT WRIT OF SUMMONS @xEndeavour is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Matthew100x v. xEndeavour [2022] SCR 21 as witnesses. The witnesses have 48 hours to mark there that they are present. Please familiarize yourself with...

The Witness should be available shortly therefore I see no reason as to why they should not be called.

Strucken from the record, Recusal requests must not be amended in response to a denial.