Search results

  1. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session MMiqa v. Department of Homeland Security [2026] DCR 77

    This objection is denied. Plaintiff should be reminded that these are interrogatories, not witness questions. Both answers are unambiguous when considered in relation to the questions asked. Should the plaintiff seek further specificity, they should do so through additional interrogatories or...
  2. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session Monzter9697 v. misterY3597 [2026] DCR 65

    Were not the chat logs submited in #31?
  3. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed Cyanfounder v. .KingCorbin100 [2026] DCR 95

    @.KingCorbin100 is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Cyanfounder v. .KingCorbin100 [2026] DCR 95
  4. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Pending Sujal1048J v. YoroZy [2026] DCR 89

    @YoroZy is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Sujal1048J v. YoroZy [2026] DCR 89.
  5. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session Monzter9697 v. misterY3597 [2026] DCR 65

    This motion to strike is denied. As the defendant points out, the text logs submitted by the plaintiff are an adequate secondary source supporting the defense's text log submission.
  6. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session MMiqa v. Department of Homeland Security [2026] DCR 77

    @MMiqa Refrain from argumentation within your filings and responses. There is a time and place for the type of argumentation you are presenting, namely during opening statements and closing statements. This is your first warning.
  7. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session MMiqa v. Department of Homeland Security [2026] DCR 77

    The first objection, Perjury, is denied. The first element of perjury, as defined in the CCA, is that a person must "knowingly provide false testimony in a court of law." This court holds that, both within the context of Fact 13 and the subsequent court filings, the Plaintiff genuinely meant...
  8. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session MMiqa v. Department of Homeland Security [2026] DCR 77

    This Motion to Compel is granted, in part as it relates to the ticket shown in P-001 and P-006. The Commonwealth has failed to establish that any other official communication between the DHS and the Plaintiff exists. Further, if such conversations did exist, one may assume that the Commonwealth...
  9. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed RobotAlan v. Icarus Waxon [2026] DCR 76

    Discovery is now open and will proceed for five days following this post.
  10. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed RobotAlan v. Icarus Waxon [2026] DCR 76

    The court will not rule on any dismissal outside of an officially filed Motion to Dismiss.
  11. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed RobotAlan v. Icarus Waxon [2026] DCR 76

    The Motion to Dismiss under Rule 5.5 is denied. Although the defence cites Rule 5.5 in their motion to dismiss, they seeminlgy missed the section wherin it states that: The Motion to Dismiss under Rule 5.12 is denied. Rule 5.12 requires lack of standing. The argument made by the deffence...
  12. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed RobotAlan v. Icarus Waxon [2026] DCR 76

    This objection is denied. Rule 3.3 specifically is in reference to a change in the following, Clerical errors relating to representation, notably separate from parties, need not be announced to the court, especially considering that a change in representation did not occur. The court further...
  13. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed RobotAlan v. Icarus Waxon [2026] DCR 76

    This objection is denied. The losses suffered by the plantiff is a question of fact, to be proven in the course of argumentation and discovery. This court will not prematurely dismiss such a prayer, let alone charge the Plaintiff with perjury, for alleging that level of damages.
  14. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed RobotAlan v. Icarus Waxon [2026] DCR 76

    Please note that naming the parties and dating only needs to be done on an initial complaint or answer, not every filing
  15. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: Dismissed RobotAlan v. Icarus Waxon [2026] DCR 76

    @lnvlsbie You have 48 hours to respond to these objections and motions
  16. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session Monzter9697 v. misterY3597 [2026] DCR 65

    @Ebborsnam you have 48 hours to respond to this motion
  17. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session MMiqa v. Department of Homeland Security [2026] DCR 77

    @MMiqa @Johnes Discovery shall be open for five days following this post
  18. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session Monzter9697 v. misterY3597 [2026] DCR 65

    Discovery shall be open for five days following this post.
  19. Dogeington

    Lawsuit: In Session Monzter9697 v. misterY3597 [2026] DCR 65

    @budgetmich1 @Ebborsnam Neither party followed the instructions in my court order. Both were explicitly ordered to not provide any other aspects of a civil response. This is your first warning. P-003 shall be struck, evidence must not be submitted outside of discovery, unless it was otherwise...
Back
Top