Lawsuit: Dismissed byeSprite v. The Executive Branch of Redmont [2021] FCR 91

Status
Not open for further replies.

SpriteTropical

Citizen
Public Affairs Department
byeSprite
byeSprite
eventcoordinator
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


byeSprite
Plaintiff

v.

The Executive Branch of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

_Austin27_, acting as the head of the Executive Branch of Redmont, has violated various clauses outlined in the constitution with the passage of Executive Order 27/21.

I. PARTIES
1. byeSprite
2. The Commonwealth of Redmont

II. FACTS
1. The Commonwealth of Redmont has violated the constitution with the passage of Executive Order 27/21.
2. In the "Powers of the President" Subsection in the constitution, the following is outlined:
a. " The President may issue non-complex Executive Orders for the good governance of the server."​
3. In Section IV of the Constitution, the following is outlined:
a. " Every citizen has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice."​

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Executive Branch of Redmont has violated the constitution as Executive Order 27/21 is a complex change and evidently wasn't made with the idea of good governance in mind.
2. The Executive Branch of Redmont has violated the constitution was Executive Order 27/21 directly deprives citizen of security as it opens them to being murdered without any outlet of justice.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Given that the Executive Branch has effectively enabled the murder of its own citizens through an unconstitutional Executive Order, I am requesting that $100 (punishment for murder regularly) be paid out for each murder that a player was the victim of and seeks reimbursement for it.


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 21st day of August, 2021.
 
Last edited:

pugbandit

Citizen
Senator
State Department
Education & Commerce Department
Public Affairs Department
1629630182784.png



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

The Defendant, the Attorney General, is required to appear before the court in the case of byeSprite v. The Executive Branch of Redmont. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures,
including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.


 

JoeGamer

Citizen
Judge
Public Affairs Department
Donator
RBA
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

byeSprite
Plaintiff

v.

The Executive Branch of Redmont
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:
1. According to Justice SumoMC’s dismissal in the District Court of Redmont (Lawsuit: Dismissed - Crazy Sprite's Fireworks (The Lovely Law Firm Representing) v. The Commonwealth of Redmont), murder was legal during the time of the purge, all crimes specified in the pardon were legal during the time, showing precedence from previous court cases of the exact same instance and similar claims for relief.
2. Under the constitution, the president may “Grant reprieves and pardons to citizens charged with breaking the law, with the exception of impeachment.” In other words, the president had the power under the constitution to pardon such crimes.
3. Previous rolling pardons have also been released and followed. Former president hugebob23456 issued a rolling pardon on drug trafficking. Drugs have killed many players due to overdosing, yet there was no lawsuit filed to overturn it. Rolling pardons have been a thing from the president before, and seeing the constitutional power to pardon, there was nothing wrong with his pardon.
4. The Plaintiff prayer for relief has monetary compensation, however, this case isn’t a class-action lawsuit, and no group has been mentioned. The Plaintiff has no right to perform such a large prayer for relief for some many people with no proof of group representation, nor affected groups.


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 23 day of August 2021
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
I will be taking over this case from this point forward as the Judge
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer

Verdict


The plaintiff in this case has expressed that he believes the President violated the constitution with his executive order. The Executive Order it’s self may have been questionable but was within his right as President. “For such directive to be lawful, it must not amend the constitution or any law outside the constitution.” The president’s Executive Order was not challenged by the Congress and by this it could be assumed that the Congress gave their approval.

In the future, I believe that the Congress should take a look at the nature of the executive order in order to set clear standards and avoid lawsuits like this.
This case is hereby dismissed with Prejudice

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top