Search results

  1. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session MrFluffy2U94 v. Commonwealth of Redmont

    BREACH OF PROCEDURE In the initial summons, the court said if the Commonwealth failed to appear, default judgement would occur. These continual interruptions attempting to steer the court away from what was already ordered, especially in such an informal manner, should be stricken and ignored.
  2. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session MrFluffy2U94 v. Commonwealth of Redmont

    Breach of Procedure This is neither an Objection nor Motion, and has no place in a lawsuit. Furthermore, Freeze is not the only member of the DoJ, surely someone else could have handled this. There is simply no excuse for the Commonwealth to miss this.
  3. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session MrFluffy2U94 v. Commonwealth of Redmont

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT The Commonwealth, with all its resources, has failed to appear. We request a Default Judgement.
  4. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session RylandW v. v__d [2025] FCR 37

    Your Honor, I will be away from Friday through Sunday. Could we perhaps have a recess until Monday if the Plaintiff agrees?
  5. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session MrFluffy2U94 v. Commonwealth of Redmont

    IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT MOTION FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTION If the Plaintiff's plots are seized prematurely it will cause irreversible harm as the plot(s) would have been transferred to another Player. We ask that any seizures resulting from the Plot Regulations Act are...
  6. Dartanboy

    Blind Typing!

    ameslap
  7. Dartanboy

    Count to 1,000,000

    There are 2000+ replies. Someone pranked us somewhere. 1056
  8. Dartanboy

    The Rhyme Game

    Orange Onomatopoeia
  9. Dartanboy

    Appeal: Denied [2025] FCR 36 - Contempt Charges - Appeal

    Username: Dartanboy I am representing myself What Case are you Appealing?: [2025] FCR 36 - Contempt Charges Link to the Original Case: Appeal: Denied - [2024] FCR 107 Appeal - Contempt Appeal Basis for Appeal: Without warning, the Judge gave both myself and my law firm Contempt of...
  10. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    In addition, your honor, the Plaintiff is attempting to open-wide every form of document they can think of, from irrelevant information like balance sheets to Attorney-Client privileged documents like legal opinions on policies. To allow this request would make every business' internal affairs...
  11. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    We would also like to note that this information is (probably) protected by IRL Intellectual Property laws. It will not be produced for a Minecraft court. (For IRL legal reasons, this is not IRL legal advice)
  12. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    Your honor, the Plaintiff had the opportunity to post interrogatories already. Discovery was even extended to allow it. Since there is now much less than 72 hours remaining, we ask these requests be denied. The Plaintiff cannot indefinitely extend this lawsuit to keep digging. They should've...
  13. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Vanguard & Co v Naezaratheus [2025] FCR 32

    Your Honor, @juniperfig May this case continue? It's been sitting without response for awhile now.
  14. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    PERJURY There is a 3rd possibility, and it happens to be the truth: c) We know that a lot of people have used the system, because a lot of people have asked for support in some way. We can also deduce from a log of all transactions that there is a large amount, without actually counting them.
  15. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    MOTION TO END DISCOVERY The Defense, while unaware of exactly how many users and transactions there were, is happy to admit both were significantly large numbers. We don't want this case to drag on and on and on chasing down the exact number. We ask the Plaintiff to agree to end discovery.
  16. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    BREACH OF PROCEDURE Rule 4.7 allows the request, and by the Judge forcible showing, of documents from the opposing party. It does not allow 3rd parties to be forced into doing so.
  17. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    Might we respond to the Motion? There seems to be an misunderstanding. Edit: Nevermind; I keep misreading. Tough day. Strike this request please.
  18. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    DECLARATION TO AMEND: Answer 7 contains an error due to a misreading of the Facts. Answer 7 will be amended as follows: AFFIRM that Executive Order 24/23 defines "personal identifiable information (PII) is "any information related to an identifiable person"." However DENY that "The Defendant...
  19. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    We also sold the technology, and no longer have the means to even access it.
  20. Dartanboy

    Lawsuit: In Session Privacy Matters (Class Action Group) v. Vanguard Securities LLC [2025] FCR 36

    The Defendant opposes an extension; Discovery has already gone on beyond the original length and we have answered all questions and shown all requested documents, within reason (we are not creating new documents that don't exist). My client has the right to a speedy trial.
Back
Top