Lawsuit: Dismissed Dartanman v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2024] SCR 17

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dartanboy

Citizen
President of the Senate
Senator
Homeland Security Department
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Aventura Resident
Dartanman
Dartanman
presidentofthesenate
Joined
May 10, 2022
Messages
1,114
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Dartanman
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

The Congress is attempting to illegitimately impeach Justice Matthew100x.


I. PARTIES
1. Dartanman
2. Commonwealth of Redmont

II. FACTS
1. There are four votes of AYE, two NAY, and 1 ABS for impeaching Justice Matthew100x [Exhibit A].
2. There are 11 Representatives [Staff].
3. The Legislative Standards Act says "The quorum when voting shall be dynamic. Where a member abstains from voting, the majority will be decided based on those who have not abstained." [Information - Legislative Standards Act]
4. It is clear that "frozen" seats, such as the 4 currently frozen Representatives are not abstaining. This is evidenced by the impeachment of xLayzur and the fact that the Quorum Act (Bill: Rejected - Quorum Act) would have changed this but failed to pass in the Senate.
5. Thus, the impeachment did not pass, as it received only 4 of 10, not 4 of 6.
6. Impeachment requires 2/3 supermajority [Act of Congress - Peach Act]

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Unconstitutional passage of impeachment

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Impeachment overturned, or at least sent back for proper voting.
2. $2500 in nominal damages.

EVIDENCE

EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
I request Matthew100x's impeachment be frozen for the duration of this lawsuit.

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 27th day of February 2024
 
I am recusing from this case.
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO NOLLE PROSEQUI

This issue has essentially been solved by Staff. This case is no longer necessary.
 
Seal_Judiciary.png




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

The defendant is required to appear before the court in Dartanman v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2024] SCR 17. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment.

I'd 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.​
 
Seal_Judiciary.png




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

The defendant is required to appear before the court in Dartanman v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2024] SCR 17. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment.

I'd 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.​
Your honors,

Since it seems you may have missed it, I requested nolle prosequi.
 
Your honors,

Since it seems you may have missed it, I requested nolle prosequi.
Ah,

The court has accepted the request. I'm sorry for not seeing this sooner.

The case he herby dismissed at the request of the plaintiff.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top