- Joined
- May 25, 2026
- Messages
- 28
- Thread Author
- #1
Case Filing
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
00f3
Plaintiff
v.
NoMoreUno
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES
1. 00f3, Plaintiff
2. NoMoreUno, Defendant
II. FACTS
1. On September 24th, 2026, NoMoreUno offered _GreyMC $103.13 to make an online tier list. (P-001)
2. Upon seeing this 00f3 offered to perform this service for $102.93. (P-001)
3. NoMoreUno responded "sold", indicating an acceptance of this offer. (P-001)
4. Approximately ten minutes after NoMoreUno accepting the offer, 00f3 sent a link to the tier list. (P-002)
5. NoMoreUno then promptly sent a payment of $102.92 to 00f3. (P-002)
6. This payment was exactly $0.01 less than the agreed upon payment. (P-002)
7. Without any further prompting, NoMoreUno then responded "go ahead. Sue me. ..." (P-002)
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Conversion (RCCA Part VII Section 7)
Part VII Section 7 of the RCCA sets out the definition of Conversion. In this instance, the Defendant deprived the Plaintiff of their property, intended to appropriate it for themselves, and obtained the property through deception. The property, being the additional $0.01, was withheld from the Plaintiff by the Defendant. This effectively constitutes depriving the Plaintiff of their property. In addition, since the Defendant maintained possession of the property that rightfully belonged to the Plaintiff, they blatantly intended to appropriate the property to themselves. Finally, because the Defendant stated that the Plaintiff would receive a set compensation for their service, while having the intent to avoid providing said compensation to its full extent, the Defendant obtained the property through deception.
2. Breach of Contract (RCCA Part VI Section 1)
Part VI Section 1 defines Breach of Contract as requiring a valid and enforceable contract, a failure to perform obligations set out under said contract, and the absence of a lawful excuse. All of these elements are present. A valid and enforceable contract had been established. The necessary elements of a contract, sets out in the Contracts Act, are the following: Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Intent, and Capacity. The Plaintiff set forth an offer by saying "I'll do it for $102.93". The Defendant's response to the offer, which consisted of simply the word "sold", clearly communicates an unambiguous acceptance. Consideration, while small, is present. The Plaintiff would provide a custom made online tier list, and the Defendant would provide $102.93 in compensation. The Defendant's intent is demonstrated in his fulfillment of the majority of the promised payment. Finally, there is insufficient cause to doubt the Defendant's capacity by virtue of the Defendant being a licensed Attorney on the BAR Council.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $0.03 in Treble Damages, as outlined in Part III Section 8 of the RCCA. This remedy, equivalent to three times the actual damages suffered, is applicable to the first Claim for Relief, Conversion. The RCCA explicitly establishes Treble Damages as a remedy for this tort.
2. In the alternative, should Treble Damages fail to be granted by this Court, the Plaintiff requests $0.01 in Compensatory Damages, pursuant to the second Claim for Relief.
3. $5 in Punitive Damages, as outlined in Part III Section 3 of the RCCA. Punitive damages, which are intended to deter outrageous conduct, are applicable in this instance. Part III Section 3 Subsection (2)(b)(iv) expressly identifies behavior that involves "... dishonesty, deception, bad faith, or abuse of trust or power;" as outrageous. The bad faith nature of the Defendant's conduct is evident. Additionally, the Defendant's comment following the payment indicates that the behavior was likely deliberate. As such,
these Punitive Damages are warranted to deter similar behavior in the future.
4. In the alternative, should none of the above damages be granted, the Plaintiff requests $1 in Nominal Damages.
5. Finally, the Plaintiff explicitly does not seek Legal Fees.
V. EVIDENCE
By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.
DATED: This 28th day of October 2026.
