Search results

I agree

Hello, I am the new presiding officer of this case Overruled. None of the questions in of themselves are leading. If we were to ask each question individually to address your concern it would unnecessarly drag this case out and waste the court and the witnesses time. Summons to the witnesses...

Granted. Answer to complaint is due 48 hours after the original deadline

@Dogeington you have 72 hours to provide your answer to complaint.

Granted

MOTION TO RECONSIDER This type of motion was impossible to file any earlier due to witness questioning still needing to be done to establish evidence. We feel this motion should still be heard for this reason. Such a motion dealing with the lack of claim for a criminal prosecution is a big deal...

MOTION TO DISMISS - LACK OF CLAIM The Commonwealth has failed to prove or provide evidence that the crime allege even occured. The only crime being alleged is Breaching Attorney-Client Privilege which under Part IX section 10 of the CCA it is defined as: "discloses attorney-client...

We have no questions your honor

Well that makes two of use. We will both find out when the motion to intervene is filed by Multiman.

Before I require you to provide an answer to complaint, The court is going to handle the matter of a potential cross-claimant and the filing of the motion to intervene first.

@12700k is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Toadking & Omegabiebel v. 12700k[2025] FCR 129

Granted. Please do so in the next 24 hours

I am the new presiding officer of this case. I will be revoking the order to show cause by Honorable Muggy21. Summons will be issued shortly

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT Verdict - Appeal of Contempt of Court Charges against Superwoops in [2025] DCR 96 Summary of Public Defender Superwoops's conduct in [2025] DCR 96 Superwoops after being assigned to this case by the Public Defender Director, reached a...

I am the new presiding officer of this case Lord @Technofied what is the status of the staff's investigation and is it still ongoing?

MOTION TO NOLLE PROSEQUI As the law has been changed on the matter at hand, my main issue in the case has been solved and I wish to drop this case.

OBJECTION - RELEVANCE Asexualdinosaur is not an employee of the DOC and any internal routes the DOC would have to address concerns would not apply to Asexualdinosaur. All three questions should be struck

The plaintiff Asexualdinosaur wishes to drop this case and have it dismissed. He requests Nolle Prosequi

OBJECTION - INCOMPETENT If the prosecution wanted a staff member to testify about a staff action, they should have had Staff be summoned as a witness and not a witness who is also a part of the staff team. OBJECTION - RELEVANCE They still fail to make any connection on why is staff needs to...

OBJECTION - RELEVANCE What does their staff position have to do with this case about accused violation of attorney-client privilege? From the current look there seems to be no reason for this line of questioning OBJECTION - COMPOUND QUESTION This question includes multiple inquires and...