Search results

In a 3-0 decision, the Supreme Court has decided to grant this appeal. The Appellant, has seventy-two hours to post their Appellant Brief. @ToadKing

In a 3-0 decision the Supreme Court has voted to reject this appeal. The ruling properly evaluated the requirement in light of constitutional structure in regard of confirmations and concluded that the omission did not invalidate Judge Amity’s appointment. The Senate’s constitutional authority...

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT VERDICT Toadking v The Commonwealth of Redmont [2025] SCR 18 Civil Action I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION The Plaintiff argues that Judge Amity’s confirmation was unlawful because they did not submit the financial disclosure required under the...

Thank you for your remarks, this appeal is now in recess pending verdict.

Objection overruled, you now have 72 hours to present your response brief. @ToadKing

A new judge is in the process of being assigned.

The Appellee will have 72 hours to present their brief. @Kaiserin_

In a 3-0 decision, the Supreme Court has decided to grant this appeal. The Appellant, has seventy-two hours to post their Appellant Brief. @ToadKing

We will follow the standard procedure and the evidence will not be admitted since it was not part of the original case. However, the motion to strike is overruled given that the appellant made a request, and not something which has disrupted this courts proceedings.

Objection sustained. The evidence was not part of the original case so it will be struck from the record.

The Appellant has 72 hours to post their response brief.

Extension granted.

The Appellee will have 72 hours to present their brief.

Yes there is, you can find it here https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/appealing-a-federal-court-decision.6657/

In a 2-0 decision, the Supreme Court has decided to grant this appeal. The Appellant, has seventy-two hours to post their Appellant Brief. Apologies for not posting this on the forums as well.

In a 2-0 decision the Supreme Court has decided to reject this appeal. The issues raised are about the conduct of a judicial officer in his official capacity as a judicial officer, which can only be reviewed through an appeal and not by filling a new case. Judges and the courts cannot be sued...

In a 2-0 decision, the Supreme Court dismisses this case sua sponte for lack of standing. The Plainitff has shown no personal injury or legal effect as required under Rule 2.1, and also lacks standing under Rule 2.1(3), as civilians cannot seek removal of officials from offices for issues...

In a 3-0 decision, the Supreme Court dismisses the Plaintiffs request for removal from office against the Vice President under Rule 2.2 for lack of standing and remands this case to the Federal Court. We believe that removing someone from office through the judiciary is only appropriate when...

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT VERDICT zLost v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2025] SCR 10 Civil Action I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION The Plaintiff argues the validity of the appointment of xDarkkex to the position of Secretary of Public Affairs, asserting that it violated the...

In a 3-0 decision the Supreme Court dismisses this case sua sponte under Rule 2.2 for lack of standing. The Plaintiff has failed to request a remedy this Court can grant to him.