Lawsuit: Dismissed funyolk v. Rossallina [2021] DCR 16

[funyolk]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


funyolk
Plaintiff

v.

Rossallina
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: Rossallina killed funyolk's pets and chickens

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I logged into the server and found my pets and chickens dead
I. PARTIES
1. funyolk
2. Rossallina

II. FACTS
1. The plaintiff had dogs, cats, chickens
2. The animals were in the wild
3. The defendant also killed the plaintiffs 4 villagers


III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The plaintiff owned the animals
2. The defendant murdered the plaintiffs villagers


IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $500 for killing animals
2. $100 for defiling 3 graves
3. $50 for the hard work the plaintiff put in to transport those villagers

Evidence: I opened a doj ticket and Sicspoti posted the screenshots in there

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 7th day of May 2021

 

[Canxx01]

Canxx01, representing Rossallina as his Attorney.
The Defense move to dismiss this case based on the following:

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

funyolk
Plaintiff

v.

Rossallina
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

1. Under IV. Prayer For Relief, the Plaintiff has stated that the Plaintiff seeks 100$ from the Defendant for "defiling 3 graves", this fact is incorrect because of the fact that the Plaintiff neither has evidence that my client "defiled" the said "graves", nor is there legal obligation for my client to pay 100$ to the plaintiff, due to the fact that the base mentioned exists in the Wild (the coordinates that indicated the place of the action were submitted in discovery, so this wouldn't be a new fact), and it is common knowledge that griefing is legal in the Wild. Since griefing was legal where the action had taken place, it would also make "defiling a grave", which is breaking blocks that have sentimental value to the plaintiff yet no visible legal protection or distinction from other blocks, griefing aswell. My client should not be held liable for griefing in the Wild, something he has every right to do, if he did so, which is ambigous as to the reason that the plaintiff does not have evidence that my client "defiled" the grave anyway.

2. Under IV. Prayer For Relief, the Plaintiff has stated that the Plaintiff seeks 50$ for "the hard work the Plaintiff put in to transport those villagers". The reasoning noted has no legal bearing to warrant monetary relief, and there is no precedent in which the Defendant had to pay money because of "hard work". Plus, yet again, there is no evidence that the plaintiff actually put in hard work to transport the villagers, as they could have just been there, and also "hard work" wasn't defined either. All in all this clause has no legal bearing or precedent to warrant seeking monetary relief from my client.


3. Under IV. Prayer For Relief, the Plaintiff has stated that the Plaintiff seeks 500$ for "killing animals". The coordinates given in the discovery that indicated where the action had taken place was unregioned, which makes the region fall under the Wild. It is legal to kill animals such as sheep, pig or cow, as there is no single evidence tying these animals to the Plaintiff, or any links that indicate that these animals were owned by the Plaintiff in a legally binding way. Just as i cannot claim a random sheep wandering a village as "my sheep", the Plaintiff cannot claim animals in a wild area to be his/hers. Thus, this clause has no legal bearing or evidence to warrant seeking monetary relief from my client, as the animals killed were in the Wild, and it is legal to kill animals in the Wild (basically Hunting).

DATED: This 8h day of May 2021

 

[funyolk]

The animals were my Pets and the evidence of the hard work put in is the dirt bridges leading to two villages and that two of them were dressed in tagia cloths and no building existed until i built it.

 

[Canxx01]

The animals were my Pets and the evidence of the hard work put in is the dirt bridges leading to two villages and that two of them were dressed in tagia cloths and no building existed until i built it.

Lack of evidence doesn't matter in motions to dismiss, anyway. All my other points still does stand, though.

 

[funyolk]

the point is that they killed my animals, souls that will never be returned, gone forever

 

[funyolk]

and the FACT that they murdered them without THINKING ONCE shows how evil minecraft players are which is why i dont live in the city

 

[Canxx01]

and the FACT that they murdered them without THINKING ONCE shows how evil minecraft players are which is why i dont live in the city

the point is that they killed my animals, souls that will never be returned, gone forever

I will ask for the Plaintiff to not refer to my client as "evil". Furthermore, the fact is that the animals which were murdered were in the Wild (the lifestock), unregioned area (according to the screenshots the Plaintiff himself submitted in the discovery) thus there is no proof of the animals being owned by anyone, and it is fair to assume that my client was just hunting in the Wild.

 

[funyolk]

First of all

 

[funyolk]

I will ask for the Plaintiff to not refer to my client as "evil". Furthermore, the fact is that the animals which were murdered were in the Wild (the lifestock), unregioned area (according to the screenshots the Plaintiff himself submitted in the discovery) thus there is no proof of the animals being owned by anyone, and it is fair to assume that my client was just hunting in the Wild.

First, they weren't just livestock, they were dogs and cats and birds. Second, I did not refer to your client as "evil" I just meant minecraft players are evil one way or the other, no where did I say your client was "evil". There is also proof of my animals being owned by me as the screenshots. They didn't just "hunt", they killed everything. The definition of hunt is to pursue and kill (a wild animal) for sport or food. Wild. My dogs and cats were not "wild"

 

[bubbarc]

Your honor, (to whomever ends up presiding over the case,) I'd like to submit an amicus brief on the behalf of the office of the attorney general.

 

[Canxx01]

First, they weren't just livestock, they were dogs and cats and birds. Second, I did not refer to your client as "evil" I just meant minecraft players are evil one way or the other, no where did I say your client was "evil". There is also proof of my animals being owned by me as the screenshots. They didn't just "hunt", they killed everything. The definition of hunt is to pursue and kill (a wild animal) for sport or food. Wild. My dogs and cats were not "wild"

The coordinates indicate an unregioned area, as far as the law is concerned the animals (bar the cats, dogs and birds you mentioned) would be in the Wild. Lifestock are not pets yet animals, and my client should not be liable to pay money when what he is accused of is not a criminal offense (That is, killing animals in Wild which are in an unregioned area).

 

[funyolk]

Ok I will remove killing livestock, my bad

 

[Westray]

Clearly the Defendant is already very much aware of this case - so I see no reason to summon him. That being said, I'd like to apologize for the delay, as it was a result of miscommunication. Nevertheless, I am happy to preside and proceed with this case. There is quite a bit to unpack here.

Firstly, the behaviour of both parties has been unacceptable. You have both took it upon yourselves to disregard court rules and procedures to argue with each other in this thread. This abhorrent behaviour and blatant disregard stops now - any party who continues to speak out of turn will be charged with contempt.

The Plaintiff has failed to attach any evidence to their complaint - citing "I opened a doj ticket and Sicspoti posted the screenshots in there" with nothing more. The court doesn't have access to screenshots in doj tickets, so I would like to kindly ask that the Plaintiff provides such evidence before we proceed. Otherwise, if the Plaintiff cannot provide such evidence within 48 hours, this case will be dismissed.

Your honor, (to whomever ends up presiding over the case,) I'd like to submit an amicus brief on the behalf of the office of the attorney general.

Thank you for your request to submit an amicus brief Mr. Attorney General. The court will recognize your amicus brief after the Plaintiff provides the applicable evidence in this case.

 

[funyolk]

Your honor, I have attached the evidence below

 

[Westray]

Thank you. Does the Defendant wish to amend or rescind their motion to dismiss based on this?

 

[Canxx01]

Thank you. Does the Defendant wish to amend or rescind their motion to dismiss based on this?

No your Honor, the coordinates and the animals listed in the evidence are enough to warrant my motion to dismiss plausability. The defense wishes to move on.

 

[Westray]

Thank you.

The court will now call upon the Attorney General to provide their amicus brief within a reasonable timeframe before we proceed.

 

[bubbarc]

Your honor I have two specific points I'd like to make before the court

1. The pet murders have no evidence to have been owned by the plaintiff, even if they did it would end up under the jurisdiction of the DOJ with no need for a lawsuit for that point in the first place

2. The defiling of the graves is not evidenced in any way, even under the plaintiff's evidence that they had just posted, nor is there any reason as to why it may have been done with malicious intent

We'd also like the courts to note that the villager murder is pending prosecution, however other than that we'd like to thank the courts for allowing us to submit this amicus brief and hope these points will be considered by the courts when the final verdict is reached

 

[Westray]

Thank you.

The Defendant may proceed with their opening statement.

 

[Canxx01]

Your Honor, i had a standing motion to dismiss.

 

[Westray]

Your Honor, i had a standing motion to dismiss.

My apologies! Amid the many messages in this thread I misinterpreted the matter, I will review it now.

 

[Westray]

Verdict

Taking into consideration the points prescribed by the motion to dismiss, and the amicus brief of the Attorney General, I see no reason to continue this case.

I agree with the Defendant's points raised in section 1. To allow players to be sue for compensation as a result of broken property in the wilderness would open up a rather egregious disregard for what is explicitly stated in the Rules & Laws, allowing the griefing of unregioned property in the wilderness. Furthermore, the accusation of "defiling" is of similar nature to the rule of griefing, which is not within court jurisdiction. Additionally, if it was plausible, there is no evidence of such "defiling".

Albeit, I do believe that the Plaintiff may potentially have a case on the sole accusation of villager murder. As the Attorney General conveyed, any case involving villager murder should be pursued in a criminal trial, as precedent has established in previous cases. In the Commonwealth of Redmont v. SonalDonal and byeSprite v. SonalDonal, the allegation of villager murder was proven in a criminal trial beyond a reasonable doubt, before monetary relief was alleged in a civil trial. Hence, the Plaintiff should contact the Attorney General to consider criminal trial.

Otherwise any of the other allegations of animal murder or of "defiling" graves have no basis, due to the lack of evidence and the points raised above.

Therefore this case is hereby dismissed.