Search results

Apologies your honour, I have been running a presidential campaign and, to be transparent, have been searching for new counsel for my client because of the major conflict of interest I have in this case. I appear to have been a few minutes late to requesting an extension, and I woke up not very...

I, Kaiserin_, declare that I will be contesting the Office of President. My Vice Presidential running mate will be juniperfig. I will be running as a member of the Workers' Party of Redmont.

We submit the following Department of Commerce report as D-006.

After a request, we will be removing Angryhamdog from the witness list. Plaintiff's current witnesses are DocTheory and Staff.

The Plaintiff would like to tender the following additional witnesses: 2. Angryhamdog (DHS Secretary) 3. Staff

It is hereby provided.

Your honour, supersuperking was involved in the merger that was planned between Vanguard and Volt, which was later stopped by the DOJ. Souper can testify as to Vanguard and Discover's situation in the leadup to the seizure, as he very briefly owned them in that time period.

1. A plethora of evidence was available as to the insolvency of Vanguard's banks. Some has been introduced, and more is pending. 2. It was not necessary, as per the Taxation Act. 3. Yes.

The defence introduces the following pieces of evidence in relation to Vanguard and Discover's financial situation at the time of seizure, as well as compliance with the DOC:

Plaintiff consents to an extension of discovery. Your honour, it is the continued negligence and miscarriage of justice by the Commonwealth that is at issue in this case. The offence we allege was an ongoing one, not a single event, and it was a continuous offence against my client every day...

The plaintiff would like to respond.

After contacting my client's former counsel, Angryhamdog, we were able to obtain the transcript. Neither I nor DocTheory had access to it because we were not added to the ticket, despite request for such. Plaintiff enters the following screenshots into evidence, pursuant to the Commonwealth's...

Apologies for the misquote, your honour, it was the result of some miscommunication within Department of Justice internal chats. What I had thought was a direct quote was, in fact, a paraphrase. That is admittedly an embarrassing mistake, but does not constitute perjury, as it was not intended...

House: 9-0-1 Senate: 6-0-0 A BILL To Appropriate Money for June 2025 The people of the Commonwealth of Redmont, 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...

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT MOTION TO DISMISS The defence moves that this case should be dismissed under Rule 5.12, lack of personal jurisdiction, and Rule 5.5, lack of claim, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges: Rule 5.12 of our Court Rules and Procedures...

Your honour, I would like to provide three defences in opposition to this motion to dismiss. I. The defence has not shown that the overblown jail time was the result of a plugin error. All the defence has shown is that the proper jail time was 15 minutes, and that it was applied automatically...

Apologies for the incorrectly labeled evidence - I seem to have skipped the number 3. The complaint has been amended to reflect the proper numbering. It should be clear that a minor error in numbering does not call for objection to the evidence itself. Plaintiff requests a response to the motion.

The Commonwealth is present.

The Commonwealth is present, your honour.

The Commonwealth is present, your honour.