- Joined
- Oct 2, 2021
- Messages
- 156
- Thread Author
- #1
- Client Name: Admin23
- Counsel Name: Admin23
- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Plaintiff
- Reason for the Appeal: The lawsuit was dismissed by the presiding judge on the basis of the one of the crimes being accused of the Defendant “not being a crime” and the other one “has nothing to do with the Plaintiff”. This is not sufficient reason to dismiss this case.
There were three times that the Plaintiff was lied to by the Defendant. At least two of those are considered fraud.
In the second paragraph of the verdict, the presiding judge states:
“While it is illegal to create their own market price for stocks on any other factors besides supply and demand, it is not illegal for the The Exchange to allow the transfer of stocks between 2 players if both players agree on a price, as The Exchange wouldn't be creating a price. Therefore it wouldn't have been illegal for The Exchange to provide the requested services.”
The law strictly states that Securities Exchanges (which the Exchange is) may not set a price based on anything other than supply and demand. The Plaintiff was supply and magsymags was demand. The Exchange refusing to process the transaction between two people (which constitute supply and demand) and forcing the Plaintiff and magsymags to use the broker bot (which is not using the price set by supply and demand) is illegal and the court’s opinion does not grasp that.
There are other reasons to add, however I will not elaborate on the entirety of the legal arguments here as this is not the proper place to do so and they should be heard in a proper lawsuit. The reason for the appeal is that the motion to dismiss did not cover all of the arguments made and was lacking in arguments and reasoning that would constitute a reason to dismiss the case brought before the court.
- Additional Information: The link to the previous case:
www.democracycraft.net
- Counsel Name: Admin23
- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Plaintiff
- Reason for the Appeal: The lawsuit was dismissed by the presiding judge on the basis of the one of the crimes being accused of the Defendant “not being a crime” and the other one “has nothing to do with the Plaintiff”. This is not sufficient reason to dismiss this case.
There were three times that the Plaintiff was lied to by the Defendant. At least two of those are considered fraud.
In the second paragraph of the verdict, the presiding judge states:
“While it is illegal to create their own market price for stocks on any other factors besides supply and demand, it is not illegal for the The Exchange to allow the transfer of stocks between 2 players if both players agree on a price, as The Exchange wouldn't be creating a price. Therefore it wouldn't have been illegal for The Exchange to provide the requested services.”
The law strictly states that Securities Exchanges (which the Exchange is) may not set a price based on anything other than supply and demand. The Plaintiff was supply and magsymags was demand. The Exchange refusing to process the transaction between two people (which constitute supply and demand) and forcing the Plaintiff and magsymags to use the broker bot (which is not using the price set by supply and demand) is illegal and the court’s opinion does not grasp that.
There are other reasons to add, however I will not elaborate on the entirety of the legal arguments here as this is not the proper place to do so and they should be heard in a proper lawsuit. The reason for the appeal is that the motion to dismiss did not cover all of the arguments made and was lacking in arguments and reasoning that would constitute a reason to dismiss the case brought before the court.
- Additional Information: The link to the previous case:
Lawsuit: Dismissed - Admin23 v. The Exchange [2022] FCR 67
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT CIVIL ACTION Admin23 Plaintiff v. The Exchange (Formerly known as the Onyx Exchange) Defendant COMPLAINT The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF The Exchange refused to follow...
www.democracycraft.net
