Lawsuit: Pending Doc v. qsdt [2025] DCR 38

T

TheGreat_Boi

Citizen
5th Anniversary
Joined
Mar 26, 2025
Messages
5

Case Filing​


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Doc
Plaintiff

V.

qsdt
Defendant

COMPLAINT

On 4/25/2025, Qsdt offered me $5,000 to kill him. While I originally told him no, he then offered me $10,000 to kill him, so I did, but once I did, he said that he wouldn't pay me, and in his words, "I completely lied; I'm not good for it," as well as saying he didn't have the money to pay me anymore even though before he said that I had done /balance Qsdt, and it showed he had around $40,000 in his account. and afterwards reported me for killing him, giving me a wanted level. Because of this, I was scared to play because I didn't want to get arrested and lose money.

For the convenience of the Court, images of the chat history have been attached
Click to expand...

I. PARTIES
1. Doc (Plaintiff)
2. qsdt (Defendant)

II. FACTS
  1. The plaintiff, Doc was offered 5k Redmont Dollars in order to kill the defendant, qsdt. After Initially rejecting the offer, the defendant rose the amount offered to 10k Redmont Dollars. The plantiff then hunted qsdt down, killing him in order to get the proposed 10k.
  2. Previously to qsdt getting killed by Doc, a thrid party player killed qsdt, then promptly asked for the money. qsdt told him that he meant for doc to kill him, and didn't give him the money.
  3. After qsdt was killed by Doc, qsdt did not give him the money, going so far as to say "I completely lied I'm not good for it"

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
  1. The plaintiff would like to argue that the discourse that occurred between himself and qsdt constituted a contract, which qsdt broke by not paying him.
  2. As per Redmont Law, contracts are legally binding provided they have all of the following: Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Intent, and Capacity.
  3. There is clearly an offer stated here, as the defendant pushes for the plaintiff to accept his proposal.
  4. Acceptance, while not explicitly stated by the plaintiff, is heavily implied by the hunting down, and killing of qsdt by the plaintiff. (As per the conditions of the contract)
  5. Consideration can be easily proven, as both sides have something to gain. The plantiff gains monetary value, and the defendant has a wish fulfilled. (His death)
  6. Neither the plantiff nor the defendant at any point during their conversation showed any sign of joking, or non-seriousness that would constitute a lack of intent. In fact since the defendant pushes for the plaintiff to accept, that further proves this point.
  7. The plaintiff has the ability to kill qsdt, as does anyone in the server, and shortly after the killing, the plantiff used the /bal command on the defendant, where he discovered he had 40k Redmont Dollars.
  8. The defendant clearly had no intention of paying, constituting misrepresentation.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
  1. $10,000 in Compensatory Damages for direct financial loss due to Defendant's breach of contract.
  2. $5,000 in Consequential Damages for loss of enjoyment and emotional distress caused by fear of arrest.
  3. $6,000 minimum in Legal Fees, subject to Section 9(2)(c) of the Legal Damages Act.

V. EVIDENCE
IMG_4037.pngIMG_4036.pngIMG_4034.pngIMG_4033.jpgIMG_4031.png

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 11th day of May 2025.
 
Your Honor,
Can we have any update on this case?
 

Writ of Summons


@qsdt is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Doc v. qsdt [2025] DCR 38.

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.

 
I, qsdt, agree to Justice Compass Law Firm representing me in court.
 
qsdt said:
I, qsdt, agree to Justice Compass Law Firm representing me in court.
Click to expand...
You have 72 hours from the time of this post to file an Answer to Complaint.
 

Motion


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

TheGreat_Boi has not provided proof of representation, making the initial case filing invalid. This case should be dismissed without prejudice.

 
@TheGreat_Boi Please provide proof of representation.

Defendant's deadline to post an answer to complaint is paused until further notice.
 
Dartanboy said:

Motion


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

TheGreat_Boi has not provided proof of representation, making the initial case filing invalid. This case should be dismissed without prejudice.

Click to expand...
As TheGreat_Boi has now provided proof of representation, this motion is denied.

I am giving the defendant 24 hours from the time of this post to provide their Answer to Complaint.
 

Answer to Complaint


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

Doc
Plaintiff

v.

qsdt
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. AFFIRM The plaintiff, Doc, was offered 5k Redmont Dollars in order to kill the defendant, qsdt.
2. AFFIRM the Plaintiff rejected the offer.
3. NEITHER AFFIRM NOR DENY the Plaintiff followed up with an offer of 10k Redmont Dollars.
4. ASSERT that even if an offer for $10k was made, it was certainly not accepted.
5. AFFIRM that qsdt did not pay Doc $10k.

II. DEFENSES
1. “Okay 10k?” is not an Offer – “a clear and unequivocal communication expressing a party's willingness to enter into a contract” – as required by the Contracts Act.

Looking at the evidence provided by the Plaintiff, Doc had just told the Defendant “you aint worth 5k” - literally the message before the Defendant saying “Okay 10k?” – The response from qsdt may have been an argument about his net worth, not an offer to a contract.

2. Even if we pretend “Okay 10k?” was an offer and a sufficiently legal one (which it is not), a Contract also requires Acceptance – “the positive and unambiguous response to an offer communicated to the offeror” – as required by the Contracts Act.

Looking at the evidence provided by the Plaintiff, Doc had killed the Defendant without accepting a contract.

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 8th day of July 2025.

 
We will now be entering discovery. Discovery will last 5 days starting now.
 
TheGreat_Boi said:
Your Honor,
Imagery of the agreement by the plaintiff to be represented can be found below. For the convenience of the court, the contract itself may be found here: Representation Contract

View attachment 56753
Click to expand...

Motion


MOTION TO DISMISS

"NotADoctor9218" is not the Plaintiff. "Doc" is.

As the person in this screenshot does not have the same name as the Plaintiff, this case should be dismissed without prejudice until such time as it is filed on behalf of the actual Plaintiff, or the actual Plaintiff appears.

 
Your Honor,
NotADoctor9218 is the plaintiffs discord handle, while Doc is his in game username. It can be reasonably assumed that the two(2) usernames aren't the same. If it pleases the court, would you like that I provide proof that they are the same person?
 
TheGreat_Boi said:
Your Honor,
NotADoctor9218 is the plaintiffs discord handle, while Doc is his in game username. It can be reasonably assumed that the two(2) usernames aren't the same. If it pleases the court, would you like that I provide proof that they are the same person?
Click to expand...
Please provide this proof.
 
Your Honor,
The image below shows the court that the plaintiff is both Doc, and NotADoctor9218. The image was provided by the plaintiff himself.

Proof of Paintiff.png
 
Dartanboy said:

Motion


MOTION TO DISMISS

"NotADoctor9218" is not the Plaintiff. "Doc" is.

As the person in this screenshot does not have the same name as the Plaintiff, this case should be dismissed without prejudice until such time as it is filed on behalf of the actual Plaintiff, or the actual Plaintiff appears.

Click to expand...
The Motion to Dismiss is denied. I am satisfied with the proof of identity provided by plaintiff's counsel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top