Search results

you may

The defendant has a right to a speedy trial. The defendant may begin to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness within the next 24 hours. The witness must respond to the questions within 24 hours after they have been posted.

Please have your lawyer request the extension directly.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT VERDICT lcn v. EddieGonza420 [2024] DCR 18 I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION 1. The plaintiff alleges that a verbal agreement was made to sell an iron drill for $8000. 2. The plaintiff claims that the defendant took the drill, failed to pay the agreed...

@IncompleteRiver you may begin questioning the witnesses, please do so within the next 24 hours. Witnesses please respond within the next 24 hours after the questions have been posted.

You were listed as a witness by the defendant

``` IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT WRIT OF SUMMONS @Unseatedduke1 and @Dartanboy are required to appear before the District Court in the case of Unseatedduke1 v. The Radish [2024] DCR 26. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a Contempt of...

Court is now in recess pending verdict.

Friendly reminder to the Defendant that they have less than 24 hours to provide an Opening Statement.

The Defendant has 72 hours to provide an Opening Statement.

The defendant has 72 hours to provide a closing statement.

Friendly reminder to the plaintiff that they have 24 hours to provide an Opening Statement.

The motion to dismiss is overruled. However, the argument presented by the defendant in the motion will be heavily considered in the verdict.

Discovery has now ended. The Plaintiff has 72 hours to provide an Opening Statement.

Sustained, due to IRL commitments the witness list presented by the defendant will be allowed.

The objection is sustained. I feel Augustus/Dartanboy's identity is not relevant to the case and will not be considered.

The motion to reconsider is sustained. The plaintiff deserves a case to hear the merits of the intellectual property claim. The intellectual property claim and the prayer for relief related to the claim are reinstated.

Objection overruled. The statement does indeed fall under the hearsay exception.

The objection is overruled. The article is relevant to the case and will be considered.

The motion is sustained, and the intellectual property claim is dismissed. Quoting someone does not constitute an infringement of intellectual property. The prayer for relief related to the claim is stricken as well.