Search results

  1. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY QUESTION IN #91 [FILED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF] The Plaintiff submits P-006 as the response to this question.
  2. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT OBJECTION - BREACH OF PROCEDURE IN #90 [FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF] Your Honour, The Plaintiff objects to this informal response made by the Defence: The Court, at the beginning of discovery in #62, stated that, "[e]very motion, brief...
  3. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT OBJECTION - BREACH OF PROCEDURE Your Honour, According to 4.8 of Court Rules and Procedures, "Answers to Interrogatories must be made within 48 hours of being asked." The Defendants are late on their answers by 18 minutes. The Plaintiff...
  4. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    Your Honour, I would like to bring to the Court's attention that the Plaintiff wishes to ask further interrogatories on the basis of the contents Motion to Compel. Additionally, to correct the record, is partially incoherent, and to correct it, "sent him a message link .. " is meant to be...
  5. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    It relates to information covered by the Privacy Act.
  6. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    Your Honour, Plaintiff requests for a sidebar, I have information to disclose to the Court that would be better disclosed in Closed Court.
  7. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT MOTION TO COMPEL [FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF] Noting the Co-Defendant's Head of Legal Department in the ticket (P-005) with TheSnowGuardian said "that is something from the bot not dependent on us now we have a policy not to share those...
  8. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    We intend to ask further interrogatories and submit motions to compel, based on how co-operative the Defence is going to be.
  9. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    Your Honour, can the Plaintiff respond to this? We wouldn't mind if this was done in a sidebar so as to not flood the docket.
  10. T

    Lawsuit: Adjourned TheStockExchange et. al v. L4ndaakk [2026] FCR 36

    Your Honour @Franciscus , We ask that our deadline for answer to complaint be tolled until the above objection is ruled on.
  11. T

    Lawsuit: Adjourned TheStockExchange et. al v. L4ndaakk [2026] FCR 36

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT OBJECTION - IMPROPER EVIDENCE, RELEVANCE Your Honour, the Plaintiff submitted the Complaint with P-001 as an exhibit, (see below). The exhibit contains texts logs of apparent transactions. However, in [2025] SCR 20 the Hnble. Supreme Court...
  12. T

    Lawsuit: Adjourned TheStockExchange et. al v. L4ndaakk [2026] FCR 36

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT OBJECTION - BREACH OF PROCEDURE Your Honour, the Defence cannot respond to the statement made by Plaintiff if it isn't formally an item recognized by the Court. If the Plaintiff believes that procedure has been breached, the Court should...
  13. T

    Lawsuit: Adjourned TheStockExchange et. al v. L4ndaakk [2026] FCR 36

    Your Honour, I did not see this. Talion & Partners INC. will retract if the Court allows the Defendant to represent pro-se.
  14. T

    Lawsuit: Adjourned TheStockExchange et. al v. L4ndaakk [2026] FCR 36

    Your Honour, Talion & Partners INC. has an existing retainer agreement which covers this suit. The binding legal agreement covers civil representation until 22 May 2026. If the Court finds such proof enough of a proof of consent to represent we will be obliged under the agreement to take...
  15. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    INTERROGATORIES TO THE DEFENDANT 1. Did you delete messages which caused this controvery (P-001) after the Plaintiff's Counsel, i.e., I, informed the SDP about your actions in a ticket in it's Discord server? (Yes/No) 2. Why did you send the message (P-001) containing the Plaintiff's...
  16. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    Your Honour, the Plaintiff requests an extension of Discovery by 3 days (72 hours).
  17. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT OBJECTION NO. 1 - BREACH OF PROCEDURE (FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF) Your Honour, according to 'Creating a Lawsuit in the Federal Court' thread a lawyer The opposing counsel for the Defendant (Plura72) said The Defence cannot speak on...
  18. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT MOTION TO COMPEL (ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF) The Plaintiff believes that the Defendant has deleted messages that replied to JuliaMC_ and messages that were sent in regards to this whole controversy. (See P-001 and P-003) TheSnowGuardian, on...
  19. T

    Lawsuit: In Session mar_milk v. Plura72 and Social Democrat Party [2026] FCR 32

    Your Honour, the Plaintiff resubmits this (modified) motion: IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT MOTION TO COMPEL (ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF) The Plaintiff believes that the Defendant has deleted messages that replied to JuliaMC_ and messages that were sent in regards to...
Back
Top