Lawsuit: Pending Dearev v. AbsInf [2025] FCR 75

[dearev]

​

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Dearev
Plaintiff

v.

AbsInf
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
AbsInf Has failed to pay a loan worth $250,000.00 back to the plaintiff

I. PARTIES
1. Dearev - Plaintiff
2. AbsInf - Defendant

II. FACTS
1. on the 4th of april 2025, absinf asked for a 250k loan to cover a 500k expense from Trincus Casino
2. The plaintiff gave the Defendant the 250k and the defendant promissed to pay it back once they had funds for it.
3. The defendant has since not responded to any attempts at communication made by the plaintiff
4. Absinf is the CEO of Trincus Casino

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Breach of contract

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $250,000.00 From the plaintiff as a contractual obligation
2. $50,000.00 in compensation
3. 90,000.00 in legal fees

Spoiler: P-001

Spoiler: P-002

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 26th day of july 2025

 

[ko531]

Writ of Summons

@AbsInfIsHere is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Dearev v. Absinf [2025] FCR 75

Failure to appear within 72 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.

 

[dearev]

Motion

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

The defendant has not responded to the summons, the plaintiff moves for a default judgment

 

[ko531]

Motion

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

The defendant has not responded to the summons, the plaintiff moves for a default judgment

Granted. This case is in recess pending a verdict

 

[Franciscus]

Your Honor,

I respectfully request permission to file an amicus brief regarding the timeline of events in this case, and how that may impact the rights of the defendant to a fair trial should summary judgement be granted at this time.

Best,
Multiman155

 

[dearev]

Your Honor,

I respectfully request permission to file an amicus brief regarding the timeline of events in this case, and how that may impact the rights of the defendant to a fair trial should summary judgement be granted at this time.

Best,
Multiman155

Objection

Breach of Procedure

case is already in recess pending a verdict, moreover the public defense program has been discontinued

 

[ko531]

Your Honor,

I respectfully request permission to file an amicus brief regarding the timeline of events in this case, and how that may impact the rights of the defendant to a fair trial should summary judgement be granted at this time.

Best,
Multiman155

Granted. You have 24 hours.

Objection

Breach of Procedure

case is already in recess pending a verdict, moreover the public defense program has been discontinued

Overruled

 

[Franciscus]

Brief

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Amicus Brief

Your Honor,

In your summons, you noted that 72 hours were available to respond to the Summons:

Writ of Summons

@AbsInfIsHere is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Dearev v. Absinf [2025] FCR 75

Failure to appear within 72 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.

The timeline of relevant events is as follows (times are in Eastern Daylight Time):

1. The summons was given at 12:16 A.M. on Sunday, July 27. (72 hours after that would be exactly 3 days later, or 12:16 A.M. on Wednesday, July 30.)
2. At 4:43 PM on Tuesday, July 29, the motion for summary judgement was made on the basis that [t]he defendant has not responded to the summons". But the Defendant had no obligation to respond to the summons by then.
3. The Motion for summary judgement was granted at 5:23 PM on the same day, again before the deadline to respond to the Summons.

The Ninth Charter Right in Section 32 of the Constitution notes that "Any citizen, criminal or otherwise will have the right to a speedy and fair trial". But the amicus worries that, should a summary judgement be granted before the deadline to respond to the summons on the basis that the Defendant had not yet responded, a right to a fair trial may be unjustly deprived. This would be clearly remedied if the Defendant does not respond within the 72 hour guideline, or if the ruling is stayed pending the closure of the 72-hour window.

What's more, the amicus worries in this case that this decision, if left uncorrected, may set a precedent affecting the rights of defendants to respond; they would no longer have the full 72 hours to announce their presence, despite instructions giving a clear and firm guideline.

For this reason, the amicus expresses concern with the ruling in favor of summary judgement at this time.

 

[ko531]

Brief

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Amicus Brief

Your Honor,

In your summons, you noted that 72 hours were available to respond to the Summons:


The timeline of relevant events is as follows (times are in Eastern Daylight Time):

1. The summons was given at 12:16 A.M. on Sunday, July 27. (72 hours after that would be exactly 3 days later, or 12:16 A.M. on Wednesday, July 30.)
2. At 4:43 PM on Tuesday, July 29, the motion for summary judgement was made on the basis that [t]he defendant has not responded to the summons". But the Defendant had no obligation to respond to the summons by then.
3. The Motion for summary judgement was granted at 5:23 PM on the same day, again before the deadline to respond to the Summons.

The Ninth Charter Right in Section 32 of the Constitution notes that "Any citizen, criminal or otherwise will have the right to a speedy and fair trial". But the amicus worries that, should a summary judgement be granted before the deadline to respond to the summons on the basis that the Defendant had not yet responded, a right to a fair trial may be unjustly deprived. This would be clearly remedied if the Defendant does not respond within the 72 hour guideline, or if the ruling is stayed pending the closure of the 72-hour window.

What's more, the amicus worries in this case that this decision, if left uncorrected, may set a precedent affecting the rights of defendants to respond; they would no longer have the full 72 hours to announce their presence, despite instructions giving a clear and firm guideline.

For this reason, the amicus expresses concern with the ruling in favor of summary judgement at this time.

I will allow the extra 3-ish hours for the defendant to appear, otherwise this case will return to recess pending default judgement.

 

[dearev]

I will allow the extra 3-ish hours for the defendant to appear, otherwise this case will return to recess pending default judgement.

Motion

Motion for summary judgment

3 hours have elapsed and the defense did not respond. Plaintiff moves for default judgment

 

[ko531]

Case is in recess pending verdict