Lawsuit: Adjourned Hugebob23456 v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] FCR 62

[HugeBob]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


hugebob23456
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

The Department of Construction and Transportation unlawfully evicted the Plaintiff from plot c587 without filing an eviction report against the plot nor notifying the Plaintiff of the eviction in advance. They also evicted the Plaintiff from plot c586 but posted images of plot c587 in the eviction report, with the only mention of the relevant plot in the eviction notice mail. Furthermore, the eviction notice cites laws that have been repealed as justification for the evictions and points to sections of the rules and laws that do not exist, claiming there is a 4 hours per month requirement under section 6 of the rules and laws but this simply isn't true.

I. PARTIES
1. hugebob23456
2. The Commonwealth of Redmont
3. The Department of Construction and Transportation

II. FACTS
1. An eviction report was made against plot c586 on the forums

2. This eviction report only included a screenshot of my ownership over plot c587, nothing relating to plot c586

3. I was only notified of the pending eviction of c586

4. I was evicted from both plots c586 and c587

5. The eviction report cites the "Regulation Enforcement Act" which has been repealed (Repealed - Regulation Enforcement Act)

6. The eviction report cites "section 6 of the Rules and Laws Page" which makes no mention of activity requirements

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. I was not notified of the eviction for plot c587, nor was an eviction report filed against the plot

2. The eviction report against plot c586 did not contain any evidence related to plot c586, instead containing photos of unrelated plot c587

3. The laws and policies used to justify the evictions do not exist or were repealed
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. The return of plot c586 to the Plaintiff

2. The return of plot c587 to the Plaintiff

3. The return of all plots unlawfully seized for playtime requirements to their rightful owners

4. A court order barring the DCT from seizing plots for activity reasons until the Congress passes a law allowing the practice

V. EVIDENCE

Eviction report: https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/c586-4aug22.14070/

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 23rd day of August 2022

 

[Krix]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS​

The Commonwealth of Redmont is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Hugebob23456 v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] FCR 62

Failure to appear within 48 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.​

 

[HugeBob]

Your honor, 48 hours have passed.

 

[Krix]

Verdict

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Hugebob23456 v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] FCR 62

I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION
- An eviction was made against plot c-586 and was improperly filed by the Department of Construction and Transportation making it invalid.

- No report was made against c-587 therefore it shouldn’t have been removed from the plaintiff's possession.

- The Department of Construction and Transportation does not have the jurisdiction to evict people from property based on activity requirements.

II. DEFENDANT’S POSITION
- Failed to appear before the court.

III. COURT’S OPINION
The Court concurs with the plaintiff's argument that the report filed by the Department of Construction and Transportation was improperly filed.

The Department of Construction and Transportation did provide the plaintiff with notice through mail that they were to be evicted from their plot c-586 for reasons classified under an “Inactivity Report” in DCT plot regulations, therefore this eviction reason is valid as it is covered under DCT regulation.

The DCT was afforded the power to create regulations to cover plot evictions in the Property Standards Act which states:
(1) The Department of Construction and Transportation shall retain jurisdiction to establish regulations outside of this law and to evict properties in accordance with these laws and regulations.
Therefore although the DCT failed to file the report properly, the plaintiff was aware they were being evicted from plot c-586 and the DCT had the authority to evict the plaintiff for failing to follow DCT regulations.

The DCT did not file a report for the eviction of plot c-587 and therefore the plot was removed from the plaintiff's possession wrongfully.
Due to this improper report including a screenshot of the plaintiff's ownership of c-587 the court recognizes this as legitimate proof of the plaintiffs ownership of plot c-587.

IV. VERDICT
In the case, Hugebob23456 v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] FCR 62
the Court hereby rules in favor of the defendant.

The Court hereby orders the Department of Construction and Transportation to transfer plot c-587 back into the possession of the plaintiff.

The Court hereby charges The Department of Legal Affairs with 1 count of Contempt of Court.

The Court thanks each party for their time. This case is now adjourned.