Search results

  1. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed 3mkTalal v. legoear [2026] DCR 52

    Plaintiff @3mkTalal, are you still pursuing this case?
  2. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed SCRGabriele180 v. Department of Homeland Security [2026] DCR 159

    Hi @SCRgabriele180, do you still wish to pursue this case?
  3. S

    Lawsuit: Adjourned MMiqa v. Bar Association of Redmont [2026] DCR 142

    The motion was already ruled upon by myself and is under review by another JO so I’m afraid I cannot allow that
  4. S

    Lawsuit: Adjourned MMiqa v. Bar Association of Redmont [2026] DCR 142

    Sustained. I will rule on the motion to reconsider after another JO responds to the Motion to Recuse.
  5. S

    Lawsuit: Adjourned MMiqa v. Bar Association of Redmont [2026] DCR 142

    Plaintiff moves to recuse based on bias, or the appearance of bias, against the Plaintiff due to a recent conviction of Contempt of Court, and that I decided to take the case based on these recent events. This last allegation is unfounded, my docket was left with one case less and so I looked...
  6. S

    Lawsuit: Adjourned MMiqa v. Bar Association of Redmont [2026] DCR 142

    Attorney @Ebborsnam is again found GUILTY of Contempt of Court. They shall be fined 30 Penalty Units and serve 5 minutes imprisonment.
  7. S

    Lawsuit: Adjourned MMiqa v. Bar Association of Redmont [2026] DCR 142

    I did warn you. Attorney @Ebborsnam is found GUILTY of Contempt of Court. They shall be fined 30 Penalty Units.
  8. S

    Lawsuit: Adjourned MMiqa v. Bar Association of Redmont [2026] DCR 142

    I am your presiding officer. Attorney @Ebborsnam is warned that one more uncalled-for post from you will result in a hefty contempt charge
  9. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    This civil action is dismissed with prejudice at the request of the Plaintiff.
  10. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    The Court agrees with this interpretation, and precedent does as well. Plaintiff @MMiqa, if you do not retract your motion to nolle prosequi, I will dismiss this case with prejudice as set forth by then-Judge Multiman155 in...
  11. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT CONTEMPT CONVICTION Disobedience of a lawful order of the Court Attorney @MMiqa has failed to abide by a lawful court order not to make out of turn statements in the following instances: The Plaintiff was previously warned by this Court...
  12. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    Objection sustained.
  13. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    This entire motion is struck from the record as it constitutes a breach of procedure to file two separate motions to reconsider on the same issue. Just for the record, you asked me if I used AI tools to write my court order. I did not. Do not try and twist my words counselor.
  14. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    Sustained. You may respond to the Motion to Nolle Prosequi.
  15. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    Granted, the 72 hour deadline starts now.
  16. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    I did not. You will be charged with another count of contempt if you fail to adhere to my instruction above and continue to make out-of-turn statements.
  17. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    The hallucinations were the following, as is stated in my order: - Claim that the following section was in the CCA on June 2, 2026: "In civil lawsuits, crimes may be used to seek damages, although damages are not presumed" - Claim that the Redmont Civil Code Amendments Act amended CCA Part I...
  18. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    Motion denied. Ground one Refer to the following: Ground two The order to appoint a Public Defender was issued by then-Judge Dartanboy, not myself. I simply fulfilled it. Furthermore, the Information - Public Defence Policy states that: So the Presiding Officer has complete discretion to...
  19. S

    Lawsuit: Dismissed MMiqa v. rykazard [2026] DCR 69

    Motion to Reconsider denied. Point I Plaintiff first alleges that a warning must always be given before a contempt charge. This is false. Rule 1.4.2 states that: Additionally, the Contempt of Court charge in the Act of Congress - Criminal Code Act states that failure to abide by an order is...
Back
Top