Lawsuit: Dismissed Bank of Reveille v. Stoppers [2023] FCR 58

[Nacho]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
EMERGENCY INJUNCTION

We request the court to freeze the current assets of the defendant. As established within [2023] FCR 32 - we request the government seize the funds and property identified as collateral and hold them until the dispute over the funds has been resolved. We request the government seize the assets listed below until the conclusion of this case. I have provided a breakdown of the currently contested funds the defendant holds.

Personal Balance: 2,781.50 [Collateral B]
Properties listed as collateral: C693 & C352 are still owned by the defendant.[Collateral A]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


The Bank of Reveille
Plaintiff

v.

Stoppers
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The plaintiff complains against the defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
The Bank of Reveille entered justly into a lending contract with the defendant. The Bank has fulfilled the obligations on our side of the agreement and has expected the defendant to do the same. The defendant has disregarded the trust of the Bank of Reveille in declaring abandonment of the loan. While we have always stood fast and wanted to avoid litigation, the bank feels there has been bad faith by the defendant and wishes to collect the currently defaulted loan.

I. PARTIES
1. The Bank of Reveille
2. Stoppers

II. FACTS
1. 6/17/2023 - Bank of Reveille submitted a property loan (PRL-0006) to the defendant for property C693, C573, C593. [Exhibit A ]
2. 6/17/2023 - The defendant agreed to the terms of the loan to which the bank authorized the loan to the defendant. [Exhibit B / Exhibit C]
3. 7/2/2023 -The defendant declared to the bank he will not be giving any more money following a payment reminder. [Exhibit D ]

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Breach of Contract - Failure to follow payback guidelines.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Per the contract, the plaintiff asks the court to sanction the defendant for loss of revenue for failure to pay back via liquidation damages through the seizure of the collateral, which the plaintiff will recover for the return on their investment.

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 2nd day of July 2023

 

[Milkcrack]

The court is granting this emergency, until such a time an answer to a complaint or a motion to dismiss has been filed. Afterwards, the defendant may submit a motion to reconsider the emergency injunction.

 

[Milkcrack]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF MANDAMUS

The Justice Department is hereby required to seize and hold
the following assets from the defendant until further notice:
1. C693
2. C352
3. The remaining money in Stoppers balance up to a maximum of 15,000


​

 

[Milkcrack]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@Stoppers is hereby required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Bank of Reveille v. Stoppers
Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case. Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.

​

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

I hereby charge Stoppers with one count of contempt of court for failing to appear and order the DOJ to fine/jail then appropriately.

This case will now enter a default judgement. Before we go into recess, the courts have a few questions for the plaintiff.

1. What exactly is the plaintiff seeking for their prayers for relief?

The plaintiff may answer within 48 hours.

 

[zLost]

Your Honor, I apologize but we need a 24 hour extension as I am Stoppers lawyer and I was out the past 24 hours, unable to write the opening statement. I was planning on asking for this extension before the time ran out, but as Stoppers has a different timezone than me, I had to wait a few hours for his agreement to representation.

 

[Nacho]

Your honor,

We would request that the contract be upheld before the court. As currently the defendant's outstanding balance on the loan not including interest is 16,665.40. We request that the assets seized be awarded to the Bank of Reveille to cover the debt obligation the defendant has to the Bank of Reveille.

 

[Nacho]

Your Honor, I apologize but we need a 24 hour extension as I am Stoppers lawyer and I was out the past 24 hours, unable to write the opening statement. I was planning on asking for this extension before the time ran out, but as Stoppers has a different timezone than me, I had to wait a few hours for his agreement to representation.

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure

The court has already gone into a default judgment period. Which under the court proceedings would be outlined within the 'Verdict' category. We request that the request by zlost be struck and not entertained by this court.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

I will grant the defendant a 24 hour extension as the extension was asked before the court was due to go into recess. This is their last extension. Their answer to complaint or motion to dismiss is due at 8:00 AM EDT tomorrow.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Subsequently, the objection is de facto overruled, however the contempt of court charge will stay.

 

[zLost]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

The Bank of Reveille
Prosecution

v.

Stoppers (Represented by killedmydreams)
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The Defence affirms Bank of Reveille submitted a property loan (PRL-0006) to the defendant for property C693, C573, C593.
2. The Defence affirms the defendant agreed to the terms of the loan to which the bank authorized the loan to the defendant
3. The Defence semi-affirms the defendant declared to the bank he will not be giving any more money following a payment reminder.

II. DEFENCES
1. Your Honor, the reason my defendant did not pay the money on the 2nd of July is because the ticket had been deleted by Nacho, the Director of the Bank of Reveille. It was reasonable for my client to assume that he would not have to pay anymore, since the ticket was deleted, which the defence affirms in one of the screenshots attached below.
2. The Defence believes that the prosecution has discriminated against the defence, as the contract states that the person would be subject to a late fee if they do not pay on time, but at the same time also says that they may be sued if they default aka not pay on time. It should not be up to the defendant what happens if they do not pay and it must be clear as required by the foundation of contract law what happens if they do not pay on time.

(Attach evidence and a list of witnesses at the bottom if applicable)

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 7th day of July 2023

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Thank you. The plaintiff now has 48 hours to provide their opening statement.

 

[Nacho]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

I. INTRODUCTION

Customers of Bank of Reveille come to us to invest in their future. The Bank of Reveille provides an avenue to accomplish that through the means of various services we offer. The defendant wanted to utilize one of those services, specifically our property loan service.

II. ARGUMENTS

1. When providing a service to an individual, the provider expects payment in return for the services rendered. In this situation, the defendant informed the provider that they would not be providing payment. (Exhibit D). The defense stated they affirm the first two and semi-affirm the third and final fact. The fact is, the defendant refused to pay at the time that the amount was owed which was already past due. There is nothing to semi-affirm, it is simply affirming the defendant did refuse to pay. To which the bank declared the loan as defaulted on, and began the debt collection clause within the loan contract.

2. The defendant previously failed to pay his loan on time. (Exhibit F). This originally caused doubt about the integrity of the loan survivability. Included within the contract the defendant was expected to keep and hold the properties being purchased as collateral for the loan. As seen within (Exhibit G) the defendant further neglected that term of the contract by beginning to sell off properties prior to the start of the case, thus necessitating the emergency injunction.

3. The Bank of Reveille, through its ability to provide great customer service to our clients, waived the first late fee of the defendant. Which is within our ability to do as the lender of the loan. Within the loan contract, the defendant signed; it is clear within the terms under the section ‘fees’ that, “The Bank of Reveille reserves the right to charge fees for certain transactions and services related to the loan.” Which merely means the bank is allowed to levy additional fees in addition to the normal payback expectation of the contract, which is an optional choice for us.

4. Within a property loan, there is a contingency that occurs when a customer fails to repay or abandons the loan, this is known as the process of defaulting on a loan. Financial institutions work to avoid defaulted loans as it means that they lose out on their investment. While the defense might claim that their client the defendant was joking as he explained within his ticket. However, it boils down to a customer refusing to pay for services rendered. The defendant had money that was given to him under specific terms, he violated those terms when he refused to pay back the loan by declaring he would not be giving us any more money.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Thank you. The defense now has 48 hours to file their opening statement.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

zLost is hereby charged with contempt of court. I order the DOJ to fine/jail them appropriately.

We will now move onto witnesses. Both parties have 48 hours to give their list of witnesses if any.

 

[Dartanboy]

zLost is hereby charged with contempt of court. I order the DOJ to fine/jail them appropriately.

We will now move onto witnesses. Both parties have 48 hours to give their list of witnesses if any.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO RECONSIDER

Good day, your honor.

Solid Law Firm has received consent to represent Stoppers for the remainder of this case. We are saddened by his previous counsel's actions, and request that we be allowed 24 hours to submit an Opening Statement, as we believe it is imperative that our client - Stoppers - receives a fair trial that allows his arguments to be heard. We agree that zLost should be held in contempt, but it is not fair for Stoppers to not have the assistance of an Attorney in court.

Proof of consent to represent:

Spoiler: Spoiler

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

When was the start of your representation @Dartanman ?

 

[Dartanboy]

When was the start of your representation @Dartanman ?

July 11, 10:42AM Central Time

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

I will be accepting the motion to reconsider. The defense has 24 hours from their motion to file an opening statement. Failure to file this will result in a contempt charge. This will not be entertained further by the courts.

For clarification purposes, the contempt of court charge for zLost will be upheld by the courts.

The defendant and plaintiff will have 48 hours from the opening statement to give the courts their witnesses. I do request, however, that the defendant attaches their list of witnesses onto their opening statement.

 

[Dartanboy]

Your honor, both parties have agreed to settle according to the contract below:

Spoiler: BoR Agrees

Spoiler: Stoppers Agrees

Spoiler: Nacho Confirms This Is A Settlement

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Thank you. Court will be in recess while a writ of mandamus is written up.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF MANDAMUS

The Justice Department is hereby ordered to transfer the assets seized from Stoppers to the Bank of Reveille.​

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

This case is hereby dismissed following the out-of-court settlement. The court thanks all parties involved.