Lawsuit: In Session IgnitedTnT v. LeafLuxury LLC [2025] FCR 131

[RiggoSoft]

Hello, I am the new presiding officer of this case



Overruled. None of the questions in of themselves are leading. If we were to ask each question individually to address your concern it would unnecessarly drag this case out and waste the court and the witnesses time.

Summons to the witnesses will be issued shortly. If there are any other pending matters that need to address that I have missed please let me know

If you overruled these would that mean my questions are unstuck from the record?

 

[ko531]

If you overruled these would that mean my questions are unstuck from the record?

They appear to have never been struck in the first place and will remain that way unless otherwise objected to, the witnesses will be able to answer these questions

 

[RiggoSoft]

They appear to have never been struck in the first place and will remain that way unless otherwise objected to, the witnesses will be able to answer these questions

Sorry I thought this was another trial I am involved in

 

[Omegabiebel]

Unwillingly present. Do I just answer the questions immediately or whats happening.

 

[Aboundedcomet]

Present your honor.

 

[RiggoSoft]

Your honor additionally I move for the court to find MgChamp in contempt of court as he has failed to respond to the writ of summons which is a lawful order of the court requiring the requested person to appear before the court. This clearly constitutes a contempt of court charge and as so the defendant moves to find the this witness in contempt of court.

@MgChamp @ko531

Additionally I ask for the court to ask the witnesses to answer the defendant's questions.

 

[ko531]

Your honor additionally I move for the court to find MgChamp in contempt of court as he has failed to respond to the writ of summons which is a lawful order of the court requiring the requested person to appear before the court. This clearly constitutes a contempt of court charge and as so the defendant moves to find the this witness in contempt of court.

@MgChamp @ko531

Additionally I ask for the court to ask the witnesses to answer the defendant's questions.

As per the server announcement a couple nights ago involving the forums being down, every deadline has been extended 48 hours from the release of that announcement. Those 48 hours are not up until later tonight. Until the deadline passes we will wait for MgChamp.

 

[ko531]

@MgChamp is hereby charged with contempt of court for failure to appear. We will now be moving to witness questioning.

@Omegabiebel @Aboundedcomet please answer the following questions in the next 48 hours

Witness Questions:

.MgChamp2339 Questions

• What is the National Exchange of Redmont?
• Have companies listed corporate bonds on the National Exchange of Redmont as a way to fund operations or projects?
• How are you related to the National Exchange of Redmont
• At the position you hold in the National Exchange of Redmont are you able to help potential clients list securities on the exchange?
• On the 11/24/2025 did the defendant contact you regarding issuing company bonds for a project?
• What were the proposed conditions of the bond?
• On 11/27/2025 did you respond to the defendant telling them that upon a board vote approval the bonds could be listed?
• On 11/28/2025 after the defendant asked how long would a board vote take did you respond with 1 day?
• On 11/30/2025 did you inform the defendant that the board had passed the vote?
• After this did you inform the defendant to begin preparing prospectus and documentation for the bonds?
• On 11/30/2025 did the defendant ask regarding the transfer of money?
• On 11/30/2025 do you tell the defendant that they can “hire an underwriter if they wish”
• Upon you informing the defendant about the option of underwriting the bonds did they respond asking you the price for that service?
• On 11/30/2025 did the defendant send you a file titled “LeafLuxury LLC Bond Agreement-2”?
• Was that file the required documentation needed to list the corporate bonds?
• On 12/1/2025 did the defendant ask you if the National Exchange of Redmont was able to list the bonds?
• Did you respond to the defendant?
• On 12/2/2025 did the defendant inform you that the sale had not gone through due to a delay?

Omegabiebel Questions

• What is Volt Inc?
• Does Volt provide business loans?
• What is your relationship with Volt?
• In your position at Volt can you approve loans?
• On 11/23/2025 did the defendant open a ticket regarding a loan in Volt’s discord?
• On 11/23/2025 did the defendant send you “The company I would lend it to…”?
• Based off of that message what type of loan did you understand the defendant to be requesting?
• On 11/23/2025 did you inform the defendant that Volt wouldn’t loan to the defendant without collateral?
• Upon your message did the defendant offer to put up plot r057 as collateral?
• On 11/23/2025 at 7:02 PM EST did the defendant ask if you were able to loan them $50,000 with r057 as collateral?
• What was your response?
• After this did the defendant ask if Volt were able to loan $100,000 if they were to provide additional collateral?
• What was your response?
• On 11/24/2025 did the defendant ask you if you were able to loan them $100,000?
• Did you respond on 11/24/2025
• What was your response?
• On 11/25/2025 did the defendant ask again if the loan was able to go though?
• Did you respond on 11/25/2025?
• What was your response?
• On 11/27/2025 did the defendant ask once more if the loan was able to go through?
• Did you respond on 11/27/2025?
• What was your response?
• After you had told the defendant that the valuator still hadn’t evaluated c521 did they offer to reduce the amount to $50,000 and only put up r057?
• Did you respond to the defendant after that?

AboundedComet

• What is Fish’s Bank?
• Has Fish’s Bank provided business loans?
• What is your position at Fish’s Bank?
• On 11/25/2025 did the defendant contact you regarding a loan?
• Did the defendant ever express to you that they were asking for a personal loan?
• Did the defendant express that they needed $100,000, had 2 properties as collateral, and had already attempted to secure a loan from 2 banks already?
• On 11/25/2025 did you inform the defendant that the bank could not loan the amount at the time?
• After you had told the defendant this did the defendant ask if the bank could loan them $50,000?
• Did you respond telling the defendant that the bank would not be able to offer the loan of the reduced amount at that time?
  
  The defendant thanks both the court and the plaintiff's counsel for their understanding of the defendant's situation and need for an extension on the questioning.

 

[Aboundedcomet]

1. Fish's Bank (also known as Fish's Financial LLC in some cases) is a subsidiary commercial bank of Fish's Corporation.
2. We provide loans to all legal entities but, as of right now, we have not provided any loans to registered businesses (to the best of my knowledge.)
3. I am CEO of the parent company of Fish's Bank and I preform operational duties such as banking and managing loans.
4. Yes.
5. Not explicitly but I presumed it was due to their terminology.
6. Yes.
7. Yes.
8. Yes.
9. Yes.

 

[RiggoSoft]

@MgChamp is hereby charged with contempt of court for failure to appear. We will now be moving to witness questioning.

@Omegabiebel @Aboundedcomet please answer the following questions in the next 48 hours

Your honor @MgChamp's answers are vital for our defense so we ask the court not to continue to closing statements until after they answer.

 

[RiggoSoft]

The defense would like to ask the court to allow the defense to conduct follow up questions after all answers to all questions from all witnesses.

 

[Omegabiebel]

What is Volt Inc?
Volt Inc does not exist.
Does Volt provide business loans?
yes
What is your relationship with Volt?
Assuming you mean Volt Bank, Inc. I'm owner, CEO and director.
In your position at Volt can you approve loans?
yes
On 11/23/2025 did the defendant open a ticket regarding a loan in Volt’s discord?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
On 11/23/2025 did the defendant send you “The company I would lend it to…”?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
Based off of that message what type of loan did you understand the defendant to be requesting?
None really. Volt doesn't have a strict loan product such as "business loan" or "personal loan". We just loan people money and check the collateral is in order.
On 11/23/2025 did you inform the defendant that Volt wouldn’t loan to the defendant without collateral?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
Upon your message did the defendant offer to put up plot r057 as collateral?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
On 11/23/2025 at 7:02 PM EST did the defendant ask if you were able to loan them $50,000 with r057 as collateral?
I don't think it's EST. But according to the transcript that I have with the 7:02PM time, Asega pinged me and asked "good?"
What was your response?
According to the transcript that I have, "it's no problem. What the company name?"
After this did the defendant ask if Volt were able to loan $100,000 if they were to provide additional collateral?
yes
What was your response?
According to the transcript that I have, that I could depending on the valuation
On 11/24/2025 did the defendant ask you if you were able to loan them $100,000?
According to the transcript that I have, no, he just asked for an update
Did you respond on 11/24/2025
According to the transcript that I have, yes
What was your response?
According to the transcript that I have, I didn't have an update from my valuator yet and that it's expected within 48 hours
On 11/25/2025 did the defendant ask again if the loan was able to go though?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
Did you respond on 11/25/2025?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
What was your response?
According to the transcript that I have, "unfortunately not yet"
On 11/27/2025 did the defendant ask once more if the loan was able to go through?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
Did you respond on 11/27/2025?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
What was your response?
According to the transcript that I have, "unfortunately not yet"
After you had told the defendant that the valuator still hadn’t evaluated c521 did they offer to reduce the amount to $50,000 and only put up r057?
According to the transcript that I have, yes
Did you respond to the defendant after that?
According to the transcript that I have, no

 

[MgChamp]

@MgChamp is hereby charged with contempt of court for failure to appear. We will now be moving to witness questioning.

@Omegabiebel @Aboundedcomet please answer the following questions in the next 48 hours

Your honor, I am very sorry for not responding to the Summon but I am now present and ready to answer any questions asked.

 

[Rookieblue14]

Your honor, I am very sorry for not responding to the Summon but I am now present and ready to answer any questions asked.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Breach of Procedure

Your Honor, the Plaintiff objects to this witness as they failed to appear to their summons in a timely manner despite the staff extension. Your Honor already ruled that only the other witness were to testify in the case, and I request you maintain that ruling.

 

[RiggoSoft]

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Breach of Procedure

Your Honor, the Plaintiff objects to this witness as they failed to appear to their summons in a timely manner despite the staff extension. Your Honor already ruled that only the other witness were to testify in the case, and I request you maintain that ruling.

Your honor this witness is crucial for defense and depriving the defense of having this witness now that they have made themselves present is depriving them of an opportunity of a fair trial and a fair chance to defend themselves.

 

[ko531]

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Breach of Procedure

Your Honor, the Plaintiff objects to this witness as they failed to appear to their summons in a timely manner despite the staff extension. Your Honor already ruled that only the other witness were to testify in the case, and I request you maintain that ruling.

Overruled. While the contempt charge will stand, the witness will be permitted the ability to answer the questions.

@MgChamp please answer the questions before the end of the deadline that has already been set.

 

[MgChamp]

.MgChamp2339 Questions

• What is the National Exchange of Redmont?
• Have companies listed corporate bonds on the National Exchange of Redmont as a way to fund operations or projects?
• How are you related to the National Exchange of Redmont
• At the position you hold in the National Exchange of Redmont are you able to help potential clients list securities on the exchange?
• On the 11/24/2025 did the defendant contact you regarding issuing company bonds for a project?
• What were the proposed conditions of the bond?
• On 11/27/2025 did you respond to the defendant telling them that upon a board vote approval the bonds could be listed?
• On 11/28/2025 after the defendant asked how long would a board vote take did you respond with 1 day?
• On 11/30/2025 did you inform the defendant that the board had passed the vote?
• After this did you inform the defendant to begin preparing prospectus and documentation for the bonds?
• On 11/30/2025 did the defendant ask regarding the transfer of money?
• On 11/30/2025 do you tell the defendant that they can “hire an underwriter if they wish”
• Upon you informing the defendant about the option of underwriting the bonds did they respond asking you the price for that service?
• On 11/30/2025 did the defendant send you a file titled “LeafLuxury LLC Bond Agreement-2”?
• Was that file the required documentation needed to list the corporate bonds?
• On 12/1/2025 did the defendant ask you if the National Exchange of Redmont was able to list the bonds?
• Did you respond to the defendant?
• On 12/2/2025 did the defendant inform you that the sale had not gone through due to a delay?

1. National Exchange of Redmont is a stock exchange where companies list their securities and public can freely trade them.

2. Yes, many companies raise money by the way of bonds.

3. I am the Founder/CEO of NER (National Exchange of Redmont)

4. Yes, before I went a little inactive I was the one who used to handle all tickets and help companies in their listing process etc.

5. Yes, LeafLuxury LLC's representative RiggoSoft asked us whether they will be able to raise funds by pledging company's interest.

6. The proposed conditions of the bond was 70% of the company's interest pledged for a 100k worth of corporate bond at 3% for 3 months

7. Yes, I told them the board would take around 1 day to vote on this and upon board's approval, we will be able to move ahead

8. Yes, I responded with 1 day

9. Yes, the board vote did passed in favour of RiggoSoft

10. Yes, I asked RiggoSoft to begin the paperwork so we can have a view over it and then list the bonds

11. Yes, RiggoSoft asked me about the transfer of money to which I responded that the money will be received as the bonds are sold

12. Yes, I offered them to hire an underwriter if they wish to.

13. Yes he asked me about the cost of underwriting service.

14. I didn't read the bond agreement since before I could read it, RiggoSoft called it off. Prima facie a bond agreement is enough for listing.

15. Yes, the defendant asked me for listing the bond

16. These were the words from RiggoSoft on 2nd December 2025 "Never mind the sale has not gone through due to a delay
We don’t need it listed anymore I would like to keep this open for any future financing options"

 

[RiggoSoft]

Your honor is there a time period you would like the defendant to conduct there follow ups?

 

[ko531]

Your honor is there a time period you would like the defendant to conduct there follow ups?

please provide follow up questions in the next 24 hours

 

[RiggoSoft]

Your honor we actually have none

please provide follow up questions in the next 24 hours

 

[ko531]

The defense has 48 hours to provide questions for cross examination.

 

[Rookieblue14]

Question for @Omegabiebel

1) Just to confirm, at no point did Volt agree to, nor provide funds to the defendant for this exchange?

Question for @Aboundedcomet

1) Just to confirm, at no point did Fish's Bank agree to, nor provide funds to the defendant for this exchange?

Questions for @MgChamp

1) How do companies receive funding through bonds issued by the NER?

2) Would the defendant have received the requested $100k as a lump payment, or as bonds are sold?

3) Did the NER ever provide funding to the defendant for this exchange?

 

[Aboundedcomet]

Question for @Omegabiebel

1) Just to confirm, at no point did Volt agree to, nor provide funds to the defendant for this exchange?

Question for @Aboundedcomet

1) Just to confirm, at no point did Fish's Bank agree to, nor provide funds to the defendant for this exchange?

Questions for @MgChamp

1) How do companies receive funding through bonds issued by the NER?

2) Would the defendant have received the requested $100k as a lump payment, or as bonds are sold?

3) Did the NER ever provide funding to the defendant for this exchange?

No, we never agreed to or provided funds to the defendant.

 

[MgChamp]

Questions for @MgChamp

1) How do companies receive funding through bonds issued by the NER?

2) Would the defendant have received the requested $100k as a lump payment, or as bonds are sold?

3) Did the NER ever provide funding to the defendant for this exchange?

1. We create a stock in our database and allot all securities to the company/entrepreneur. After that they start to put sell orders and people gradually buy the bonds, then gradually these sales take place and the company receives the funds for the bonds.

2. If he opted for underwriting service then a lump sum payment would've been made to him by the underwriter but if not, then he would receive 100k as and when sold.

3. No, but we offered underwriting service through xSyncx.

 

[Omegabiebel]

Question for @Omegabiebel

1) Just to confirm, at no point did Volt agree to, nor provide funds to the defendant for this exchange?

Question for @Aboundedcomet

1) Just to confirm, at no point did Fish's Bank agree to, nor provide funds to the defendant for this exchange?

Questions for @MgChamp

1) How do companies receive funding through bonds issued by the NER?

2) Would the defendant have received the requested $100k as a lump payment, or as bonds are sold?

3) Did the NER ever provide funding to the defendant for this exchange?

Apologies for the tardiness. I forgor.

I agreed to provide funds contingent on the valuation (see ticket). No funds were provided before the ticket closed.

 

[ko531]

@Rookieblue14 do you have any follow up questions?

 

[Rookieblue14]

@Rookieblue14 do you have any follow up questions?

No follow ups, thank you Your Honor!

 

[ko531]

We will now be moving to closing statements. The plaintiff has 72 hours to provide their closing statements followed by 72 hours for the defense from when the plaintiff's post their closing statements

 

[Rookieblue14]

Closing Statement

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Raz0Baz0 v. vishy1x [2025] DCR 92

Your Honor, we ask that the Defendant be held liable for failing to follow through on their obligations for this contract. The Defendant agreed to acquire my client's company, was given extension in excess of what the contract required to make good on their obligations, and ultimately failed to pay. The Defendant affirmed almost every single fact of this case with the exception that my client

A Contract was In Place
The Court must first determine whether a contract was in place. Throughout the case we've shown:

1) An Offer was made. The Defendant offered R$175,000 in exchange for Torchlight Luxury Properties LLC (P-001).
2) There was acceptance of that offer as both my client and the defendant singed the contract (P-001 and P-002).
3) The prong of consideration was met. The defendant was exchanging money for my client's business, Discord server, and properties.
4) Both parties showed intent to enter into this contract, as my client and the defendant discussed the status and holdings of Torchlight Luxury Properties LLC, the terms of the contract, and other such matters (P-001). Additionally, the contract signed by both parties states, "The buyer intends to buy the company and all of its assets and take all of its liabilities from the seller for $175,000. The seller intends to sell the company and all of its assets to the buyer for $175,000." (P-002)
5) Both parties had the capacity to enter into this contract. The defendant discussed the terms of the contract, added a stipulation into the contract regarding the mortgages being held on two of the properties, demonstrating the defendant clearly was versed enough to take appropriate actions to protect themselves. (P-001).

When all five prongs are met, a valid contract is formed per the Contracts Act.

Addressing the Defendant's Defenses
1) The defendant did not knowingly enter a contract the defendant could not pay for and did not act in bad faith.

On November 23rd, 2025 the Defendant stated, "Yes Ill probably be able to pay and sign by tomorrow" (P-001). The Defendant's statement here is key, as it would indicate to a reasonable person that the funds for the purchase are readily available, or otherwise would be very soon.

On November 24th, 2025 the Defendant then states, "I will send agreement tomorrow @Coffeeman just have some stuff to figure out regarding financing the deal" (P-001). This is the first time that the Defendant makes any mention of not having immediate access to the funds.

On November 25th, 2025 both my client and the Defendant then signed the contract (P-001).

On November 26th, 2025 the Defendant acknowledged my client had transferred all assets to them and states, "I have until Friday at 1013 to pay you what your owed" (P-001). The deadline for payment was November 28th, 48 hours after the Defendant had received all assets (P-001 and P-002).

On November 27th, 2025 the Defendant first gives notice to my client that they do not have financing for the sale, stating, "financing isnt coming through easily it will either be paid tomorrow, or late, if it is late you can reverse the sale outlined by the agreement". My client inquires into how late and graciously offers to waive the late fees that would otherwise accrue per the contract, to which the Defendant replies, "I do not know". (P-001)

On November 28th, 2025 my Client requests an update on the status of payment, and, after the deadline to provide payment passes offers to assist the Defendant with obtaining financing, which the Defendant declines. (P-001)

On November 30th, 2025 my Client again asks for an update on payment, which the Defendant refuses to provide a direct answer, stating, "I have until 1013 if I can't get it to you you are able to reverse the sale". The Defendant then states he does have financing, "We did just get financing though so if your willing to we can go ahead with the deal with respective late penalty for the delay". My Client expresses interest in continuing the deal and requested payment which was never received. (P-001)

On December 1st, 2025 the Defendant then states he still does not have funds, stating, "Financing payment still being delivered" (P-001).

On December 2nd, 2025 my Client again requests a status update and requests to see a screenshot of the Defendant's conversation with the NER to confirm that financing was being worked on, which the Defendant declined to provide. My Client at this point exercises his rights under the contract to reverse the deal. (P-001 and P-002).

As demonstrated by the Defendant's own witnesses he did not secure funding for this contract within the timeframe specified in the contract, and despite a generous extension to the timeframe and waiver of late fees, still was unable to provide funding. The Defendant did indeed knowingly enter into this contract without having the agreed upon funds to pay.

2) Additionally the defendant had warned and suggested the plaintiff into reversing the sale if the defendant passed the outlined window of time to deliver the payment to the plaintiff.

According to the Contracts Act, "A contract may be terminated by mutual agreement, successful performance, frustration, or due to a material breach." A Material Breach is defined under the same act as, "(9) 'Material Breach' is a significant failure to fulfil contractual obligations." The defendant failing to pay the sum agreed upon constitutes a significant failure to fulfill contractual obligations. This means that my Client could have terminated the Contract at any time after the Defendant failed to pay within the agreed upon time frame.

The defense attempts to mitigate their own failure to fulfill their obligations under the contract by reminding my Client of their rights under the Contract and the law. This, frankly, is not a defense nor a shield to failing to uphold their obligations.

3) Furthermore the plaintiff had attempted to hide the fact from the defendant that the properties the defendant had been attempting to purchase had outstanding mortgages on them.

The defense accuses my client of concealing the fact that two of the properties being acquired had mortgages on them, which is categorically proven false (P-001). The defendant asked my client whether there were any mortgages on the properties, and my client promptly and directly answered in the affirmative they did. There was no evidence provided by the defense to substantiate this claim at it should be fully discarded.

4) The plaintiff had spent effectively less than 5 hours of time while the defendant had drafted the entire agreement, conducted questions for the plaintiff and had attempted to secure financing for the deal.

The defense's statement here should equally be discarded. As demonstrated by the transcript (P-001) my Client promptly responded the the Defense's questions when establishing the terms of the agreement, promptly transferred the assets in question with the exception of one, and took great lengths to find ways to transfer the last asset when he ran into technical difficulties. The defense provided zero evidence establishing the total time my client put into the sale of this company, but the transcripts show my Client actively and continuously making efforts to answer the Defendant's questions, transfer company assets as agreed upon in the contract, and attempting to receive payment due which the Defendant failed to provide.

Our Claims for Relief
1) Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealings

The Contract Act states that, "Parties to a contract shall perform their respective duties and exercise their rights under the contract in good faith and in a manner that is fair and just" and, "There exists an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in every contract covered by this Act, whether or not expressly stated." The Defendant here failed to disclose they did not have any funding source already set up before entering into the contract with my client and failed to perform their duties under the contract.

According to the Contracts Act, a Breach of Contract occurs when "a party fails to fulfil its contractual obligations". The same act states, " Remedies for breach may include damages, specific performance, or other equitable relief." The Legal Damages Act authorizes Compensatory Damages as compensation; security or protection against a loss or other financial burden; or the restoration of something lost or stolen to its proper owner.

We contend the Defendant's actions in this case were also outrageous which would warrant Punitive Damages. The Legal Damages Act authorizes Punitive Damages "against a person to punish them for their outrageous conduct and to deter them and others like them from similar conduct in the future". The Defendant knowingly entered into a Contract without funding, continued to string my Client along with the promise of funding, and ultimately failed to hold up their end of the deal.

Case law from similar proceedings support our claim for relief here. In the case lukeyyy v. Culls [2025] FCR 114 the Defendant failed to provide payment after signing a contract and was ordered to provide payment. In 12700k v. MattTheSavvy [2025] FCR 89 the Defendant similarly failed to fulfill their end of the contract by not providing payment and was found to be in breach of the contract.

We ask the Court to provide appropriate damages in line with the law and precedent.

2) Time & Labor in Executing the Contract

As demonstrated throughout this case, my Client put significant time and effort into negotiating, developing, and completing this deal. The Defendant's own actions are what led to this deal failing, and my Client should be compensated for their time devoted to this. The Legal Damages Act authorizes the issuance of Consequential Damages when damages are otherwise incalculable. As the specific amount of time my Client put into pursuing this deal is unable to specifically be calculated we ask to be awarded appropriately by the Court.

We thank the Court for their time hearing us during this case, and ask the Court to find in favor of the plaintiff and award damages as requested.

 

[RiggoSoft]

Closing Statement

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Raz0Baz0 v. vishy1x [2025] DCR 92

Your Honor, we ask that the Defendant be held liable for failing to follow through on their obligations for this contract. The Defendant agreed to acquire my client's company, was given extension in excess of what the contract required to make good on their obligations, and ultimately failed to pay. The Defendant affirmed almost every single fact of this case with the exception that my client

A Contract was In Place
The Court must first determine whether a contract was in place. Throughout the case we've shown:

1) An Offer was made. The Defendant offered R$175,000 in exchange for Torchlight Luxury Properties LLC (P-001).
2) There was acceptance of that offer as both my client and the defendant singed the contract (P-001 and P-002).
3) The prong of consideration was met. The defendant was exchanging money for my client's business, Discord server, and properties.
4) Both parties showed intent to enter into this contract, as my client and the defendant discussed the status and holdings of Torchlight Luxury Properties LLC, the terms of the contract, and other such matters (P-001). Additionally, the contract signed by both parties states, "The buyer intends to buy the company and all of its assets and take all of its liabilities from the seller for $175,000. The seller intends to sell the company and all of its assets to the buyer for $175,000." (P-002)
5) Both parties had the capacity to enter into this contract. The defendant discussed the terms of the contract, added a stipulation into the contract regarding the mortgages being held on two of the properties, demonstrating the defendant clearly was versed enough to take appropriate actions to protect themselves. (P-001).

When all five prongs are met, a valid contract is formed per the Contracts Act.

Addressing the Defendant's Defenses
1) The defendant did not knowingly enter a contract the defendant could not pay for and did not act in bad faith.

On November 23rd, 2025 the Defendant stated, "Yes Ill probably be able to pay and sign by tomorrow" (P-001). The Defendant's statement here is key, as it would indicate to a reasonable person that the funds for the purchase are readily available, or otherwise would be very soon.

On November 24th, 2025 the Defendant then states, "I will send agreement tomorrow @Coffeeman just have some stuff to figure out regarding financing the deal" (P-001). This is the first time that the Defendant makes any mention of not having immediate access to the funds.

On November 25th, 2025 both my client and the Defendant then signed the contract (P-001).

On November 26th, 2025 the Defendant acknowledged my client had transferred all assets to them and states, "I have until Friday at 1013 to pay you what your owed" (P-001). The deadline for payment was November 28th, 48 hours after the Defendant had received all assets (P-001 and P-002).

On November 27th, 2025 the Defendant first gives notice to my client that they do not have financing for the sale, stating, "financing isnt coming through easily it will either be paid tomorrow, or late, if it is late you can reverse the sale outlined by the agreement". My client inquires into how late and graciously offers to waive the late fees that would otherwise accrue per the contract, to which the Defendant replies, "I do not know". (P-001)

On November 28th, 2025 my Client requests an update on the status of payment, and, after the deadline to provide payment passes offers to assist the Defendant with obtaining financing, which the Defendant declines. (P-001)

On November 30th, 2025 my Client again asks for an update on payment, which the Defendant refuses to provide a direct answer, stating, "I have until 1013 if I can't get it to you you are able to reverse the sale". The Defendant then states he does have financing, "We did just get financing though so if your willing to we can go ahead with the deal with respective late penalty for the delay". My Client expresses interest in continuing the deal and requested payment which was never received. (P-001)

On December 1st, 2025 the Defendant then states he still does not have funds, stating, "Financing payment still being delivered" (P-001).

On December 2nd, 2025 my Client again requests a status update and requests to see a screenshot of the Defendant's conversation with the NER to confirm that financing was being worked on, which the Defendant declined to provide. My Client at this point exercises his rights under the contract to reverse the deal. (P-001 and P-002).

As demonstrated by the Defendant's own witnesses he did not secure funding for this contract within the timeframe specified in the contract, and despite a generous extension to the timeframe and waiver of late fees, still was unable to provide funding. The Defendant did indeed knowingly enter into this contract without having the agreed upon funds to pay.

2) Additionally the defendant had warned and suggested the plaintiff into reversing the sale if the defendant passed the outlined window of time to deliver the payment to the plaintiff.

According to the Contracts Act, "A contract may be terminated by mutual agreement, successful performance, frustration, or due to a material breach." A Material Breach is defined under the same act as, "(9) 'Material Breach' is a significant failure to fulfil contractual obligations." The defendant failing to pay the sum agreed upon constitutes a significant failure to fulfill contractual obligations. This means that my Client could have terminated the Contract at any time after the Defendant failed to pay within the agreed upon time frame.

The defense attempts to mitigate their own failure to fulfill their obligations under the contract by reminding my Client of their rights under the Contract and the law. This, frankly, is not a defense nor a shield to failing to uphold their obligations.

3) Furthermore the plaintiff had attempted to hide the fact from the defendant that the properties the defendant had been attempting to purchase had outstanding mortgages on them.

The defense accuses my client of concealing the fact that two of the properties being acquired had mortgages on them, which is categorically proven false (P-001). The defendant asked my client whether there were any mortgages on the properties, and my client promptly and directly answered in the affirmative they did. There was no evidence provided by the defense to substantiate this claim at it should be fully discarded.

4) The plaintiff had spent effectively less than 5 hours of time while the defendant had drafted the entire agreement, conducted questions for the plaintiff and had attempted to secure financing for the deal.

The defense's statement here should equally be discarded. As demonstrated by the transcript (P-001) my Client promptly responded the the Defense's questions when establishing the terms of the agreement, promptly transferred the assets in question with the exception of one, and took great lengths to find ways to transfer the last asset when he ran into technical difficulties. The defense provided zero evidence establishing the total time my client put into the sale of this company, but the transcripts show my Client actively and continuously making efforts to answer the Defendant's questions, transfer company assets as agreed upon in the contract, and attempting to receive payment due which the Defendant failed to provide.

Our Claims for Relief
1) Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealings

The Contract Act states that, "Parties to a contract shall perform their respective duties and exercise their rights under the contract in good faith and in a manner that is fair and just" and, "There exists an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in every contract covered by this Act, whether or not expressly stated." The Defendant here failed to disclose they did not have any funding source already set up before entering into the contract with my client and failed to perform their duties under the contract.

According to the Contracts Act, a Breach of Contract occurs when "a party fails to fulfil its contractual obligations". The same act states, " Remedies for breach may include damages, specific performance, or other equitable relief." The Legal Damages Act authorizes Compensatory Damages as compensation; security or protection against a loss or other financial burden; or the restoration of something lost or stolen to its proper owner.

We contend the Defendant's actions in this case were also outrageous which would warrant Punitive Damages. The Legal Damages Act authorizes Punitive Damages "against a person to punish them for their outrageous conduct and to deter them and others like them from similar conduct in the future". The Defendant knowingly entered into a Contract without funding, continued to string my Client along with the promise of funding, and ultimately failed to hold up their end of the deal.

Case law from similar proceedings support our claim for relief here. In the case lukeyyy v. Culls [2025] FCR 114 the Defendant failed to provide payment after signing a contract and was ordered to provide payment. In 12700k v. MattTheSavvy [2025] FCR 89 the Defendant similarly failed to fulfill their end of the contract by not providing payment and was found to be in breach of the contract.

We ask the Court to provide appropriate damages in line with the law and precedent.

2) Time & Labor in Executing the Contract

As demonstrated throughout this case, my Client put significant time and effort into negotiating, developing, and completing this deal. The Defendant's own actions are what led to this deal failing, and my Client should be compensated for their time devoted to this. The Legal Damages Act authorizes the issuance of Consequential Damages when damages are otherwise incalculable. As the specific amount of time my Client put into pursuing this deal is unable to specifically be calculated we ask to be awarded appropriately by the Court.

We thank the Court for their time hearing us during this case, and ask the Court to find in favor of the plaintiff and award damages as requested.

Closing Statement

Ladies and gentleman of the court this entire case has proven to be nothing more than a waste of time, money, and resources for both parties.

First of all the plaintiff's counsel doesn't even fully understand the current charges brought against the defendant, in their closing they argue that "ask that the Defendant be held liable for failing to follow through on their obligations for this contract." insuiniating that the court should award damages to the plaintiff based on this, this is despite the plaintiff never having filed a breach of contract charge against the defendant. They continue to bring this claim about breach of contract multiple times which just shows the plaintiff is attempting to throw anything at the defendant in attempts to secure the largest amount of damages.

The plaintiff claims that the defendant had acted in bad faith however never proves this and the defense disproves these claims easily and actually proves that the plaintiff may have acted in bad faith during the negotiation period.

In the defenses exhibits 8-10 it shows the defendant having asked a credible borrower regarding financing of the deal, additionally the borrower agrees to loaning the defendant a sum of $50,000 for the acquisition of the company in the line "it's no problem. What the company name?" (D-09). In addition to this the defendant keeps asking the same lender regarding borrowing during the alloted 48 hour time period after the plaintiff's delivery. As seen in D-10 the defendant attempts to raise the lended amount from the borrower to make sure they were able to pay the plaintiff in time ultimately due to the lender's valuator's absense the lender was not able to approve the defendant for the loan.

In another instance we can see the defendant had attempted to secure a loan from the lender Reverie Reserve in the defenses exhibits 5&6. The defendant had attempted to start securing a loan from the lender prior to the contract being signed as seen in exhibit 5 at 1:19PM on 11/23/2025 when the defendant asked "Could you loan 50-100k?" to which the lender responded "yeah I have enough money to loan 100k", which ultimately convicned the defendant that the lender was willing to fund them and that the defendant was able to sign the contact, which they did. Further on in the conversation the lender ghosts the defendant and ultimately tells them they are not able to provide them the loan as seen on D-06.

A third instance of the defendant attempting to secure funding from a lender after two lenders mentioned previously in the two instances above were not able to provide a loan to the defendant. In the defenses exhibit D-11 we can obviously see the panicked state the defendant is in as they were not wanting to fail to meet the payment deadline and act in good faith to the plaintiff. This is further supported by the question asked by the defendant in D-12 on 11/26 when they bluntly ask "Do you think you can get it by Friday or no?" furthermore proving that the defendant was exhausting all of their avaliable resources to act in good faith to the defendant. Once again, the lender ultimately does not provide funding for the acquisition to defendant.

Finally, the fourth instance of the defendant attempting to secure funding was through listing corporate bonds which put their own ownership up at stake. We can see in the defenses exhibits 1-4 that they had proposed, and agreed on listing corporate bonds on the National Exchange of Redmont. After being denied from all previous lenders mentioned above the defendant turned to their final potential way of funding which was to list corporate bonds onto the National Exchange of Redmont. As seen in D-02 on 11/30 the NER's board of directors had approved the listing of the corporate bonds that would have raised the needed $100,000 for the acquisition. Shortly afterwards the defendant had sent the neccesary documents(D-07) that was the only material required for the bonds to be listed. It was only due to the NER's delay as seen in the exhibits that the defendant was unable to secure the funding and pay the plaintiff which they tried so hard to do.

Regarding the plaintiff's attacks against the defendant saying that a lender had never agreed to lend to the defendant, the lenders in question testified that they did agree to loan the defendant funds(Post 125&117).

But besides the defense's points it is clear to see that plaintiff has failed to prove the defendant acted in bad faith, and their whole tactic to win this case and put the largest amount of finacial burden onto the defendant as possible is to just attempt to poke holes into the defense's defense which have been sorry attempts that have been proven to be false by the defense.

Regarding the claims on time executing the contract, these claims are absolutely ludicrious. In the transcript the plaintiff sends 1443 words, but to be conservative in case there were mistakes in the counting lets say there were 1600 words the plaintiff sends. At a slower than average typing speed of 35 words per minute the defendant would have ~46 minutes. To be conservative lets assume it took the defendant 45 minutes to transfer documents, and files they were given days to prepare, and all ingame property that can be transfered via a discord command that takes at maxmimum a minute to fill out, and the in game firm the Department of Commerce was transfering to the defendant due to the plaintiff having technical issues. This would still only equal 1 hour and 31 minutes nowhere near what the plaintiff wants you to believe and no way equitable to the $6,000 the plaintiff is asking for.

As the court can see not only are these claims against the defendant ridiciolous and based without evidence it has also been a waste of time and an attempt by both the plaintiff and their counsel to recieve the largest amount of damages from a small newly founded real estate company who is now directly competing with the plaintiff. We ultimately plead with the court to administer the justice that is owed to the defendant and find the defendant not liable for all charges.

 

[RiggoSoft]

Additionally your honor I have some objections and motions to file but its quite late my time so I am going to do them in the morning.

 

[RiggoSoft]

Closing Statement

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Raz0Baz0 v. vishy1x [2025] DCR 92

Your Honor, we ask that the Defendant be held liable for failing to follow through on their obligations for this contract. The Defendant agreed to acquire my client's company, was given extension in excess of what the contract required to make good on their obligations, and ultimately failed to pay. The Defendant affirmed almost every single fact of this case with the exception that my client

A Contract was In Place
The Court must first determine whether a contract was in place. Throughout the case we've shown:

1) An Offer was made. The Defendant offered R$175,000 in exchange for Torchlight Luxury Properties LLC (P-001).
2) There was acceptance of that offer as both my client and the defendant singed the contract (P-001 and P-002).
3) The prong of consideration was met. The defendant was exchanging money for my client's business, Discord server, and properties.
4) Both parties showed intent to enter into this contract, as my client and the defendant discussed the status and holdings of Torchlight Luxury Properties LLC, the terms of the contract, and other such matters (P-001). Additionally, the contract signed by both parties states, "The buyer intends to buy the company and all of its assets and take all of its liabilities from the seller for $175,000. The seller intends to sell the company and all of its assets to the buyer for $175,000." (P-002)
5) Both parties had the capacity to enter into this contract. The defendant discussed the terms of the contract, added a stipulation into the contract regarding the mortgages being held on two of the properties, demonstrating the defendant clearly was versed enough to take appropriate actions to protect themselves. (P-001).

When all five prongs are met, a valid contract is formed per the Contracts Act.

Addressing the Defendant's Defenses
1) The defendant did not knowingly enter a contract the defendant could not pay for and did not act in bad faith.

On November 23rd, 2025 the Defendant stated, "Yes Ill probably be able to pay and sign by tomorrow" (P-001). The Defendant's statement here is key, as it would indicate to a reasonable person that the funds for the purchase are readily available, or otherwise would be very soon.

On November 24th, 2025 the Defendant then states, "I will send agreement tomorrow @Coffeeman just have some stuff to figure out regarding financing the deal" (P-001). This is the first time that the Defendant makes any mention of not having immediate access to the funds.

On November 25th, 2025 both my client and the Defendant then signed the contract (P-001).

On November 26th, 2025 the Defendant acknowledged my client had transferred all assets to them and states, "I have until Friday at 1013 to pay you what your owed" (P-001). The deadline for payment was November 28th, 48 hours after the Defendant had received all assets (P-001 and P-002).

On November 27th, 2025 the Defendant first gives notice to my client that they do not have financing for the sale, stating, "financing isnt coming through easily it will either be paid tomorrow, or late, if it is late you can reverse the sale outlined by the agreement". My client inquires into how late and graciously offers to waive the late fees that would otherwise accrue per the contract, to which the Defendant replies, "I do not know". (P-001)

On November 28th, 2025 my Client requests an update on the status of payment, and, after the deadline to provide payment passes offers to assist the Defendant with obtaining financing, which the Defendant declines. (P-001)

On November 30th, 2025 my Client again asks for an update on payment, which the Defendant refuses to provide a direct answer, stating, "I have until 1013 if I can't get it to you you are able to reverse the sale". The Defendant then states he does have financing, "We did just get financing though so if your willing to we can go ahead with the deal with respective late penalty for the delay". My Client expresses interest in continuing the deal and requested payment which was never received. (P-001)

On December 1st, 2025 the Defendant then states he still does not have funds, stating, "Financing payment still being delivered" (P-001).

On December 2nd, 2025 my Client again requests a status update and requests to see a screenshot of the Defendant's conversation with the NER to confirm that financing was being worked on, which the Defendant declined to provide. My Client at this point exercises his rights under the contract to reverse the deal. (P-001 and P-002).

As demonstrated by the Defendant's own witnesses he did not secure funding for this contract within the timeframe specified in the contract, and despite a generous extension to the timeframe and waiver of late fees, still was unable to provide funding. The Defendant did indeed knowingly enter into this contract without having the agreed upon funds to pay.

2) Additionally the defendant had warned and suggested the plaintiff into reversing the sale if the defendant passed the outlined window of time to deliver the payment to the plaintiff.

According to the Contracts Act, "A contract may be terminated by mutual agreement, successful performance, frustration, or due to a material breach." A Material Breach is defined under the same act as, "(9) 'Material Breach' is a significant failure to fulfil contractual obligations." The defendant failing to pay the sum agreed upon constitutes a significant failure to fulfill contractual obligations. This means that my Client could have terminated the Contract at any time after the Defendant failed to pay within the agreed upon time frame.

The defense attempts to mitigate their own failure to fulfill their obligations under the contract by reminding my Client of their rights under the Contract and the law. This, frankly, is not a defense nor a shield to failing to uphold their obligations.

3) Furthermore the plaintiff had attempted to hide the fact from the defendant that the properties the defendant had been attempting to purchase had outstanding mortgages on them.

The defense accuses my client of concealing the fact that two of the properties being acquired had mortgages on them, which is categorically proven false (P-001). The defendant asked my client whether there were any mortgages on the properties, and my client promptly and directly answered in the affirmative they did. There was no evidence provided by the defense to substantiate this claim at it should be fully discarded.

4) The plaintiff had spent effectively less than 5 hours of time while the defendant had drafted the entire agreement, conducted questions for the plaintiff and had attempted to secure financing for the deal.

The defense's statement here should equally be discarded. As demonstrated by the transcript (P-001) my Client promptly responded the the Defense's questions when establishing the terms of the agreement, promptly transferred the assets in question with the exception of one, and took great lengths to find ways to transfer the last asset when he ran into technical difficulties. The defense provided zero evidence establishing the total time my client put into the sale of this company, but the transcripts show my Client actively and continuously making efforts to answer the Defendant's questions, transfer company assets as agreed upon in the contract, and attempting to receive payment due which the Defendant failed to provide.

Our Claims for Relief
1) Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealings

The Contract Act states that, "Parties to a contract shall perform their respective duties and exercise their rights under the contract in good faith and in a manner that is fair and just" and, "There exists an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in every contract covered by this Act, whether or not expressly stated." The Defendant here failed to disclose they did not have any funding source already set up before entering into the contract with my client and failed to perform their duties under the contract.

According to the Contracts Act, a Breach of Contract occurs when "a party fails to fulfil its contractual obligations". The same act states, " Remedies for breach may include damages, specific performance, or other equitable relief." The Legal Damages Act authorizes Compensatory Damages as compensation; security or protection against a loss or other financial burden; or the restoration of something lost or stolen to its proper owner.

We contend the Defendant's actions in this case were also outrageous which would warrant Punitive Damages. The Legal Damages Act authorizes Punitive Damages "against a person to punish them for their outrageous conduct and to deter them and others like them from similar conduct in the future". The Defendant knowingly entered into a Contract without funding, continued to string my Client along with the promise of funding, and ultimately failed to hold up their end of the deal.

Case law from similar proceedings support our claim for relief here. In the case lukeyyy v. Culls [2025] FCR 114 the Defendant failed to provide payment after signing a contract and was ordered to provide payment. In 12700k v. MattTheSavvy [2025] FCR 89 the Defendant similarly failed to fulfill their end of the contract by not providing payment and was found to be in breach of the contract.

We ask the Court to provide appropriate damages in line with the law and precedent.

2) Time & Labor in Executing the Contract

As demonstrated throughout this case, my Client put significant time and effort into negotiating, developing, and completing this deal. The Defendant's own actions are what led to this deal failing, and my Client should be compensated for their time devoted to this. The Legal Damages Act authorizes the issuance of Consequential Damages when damages are otherwise incalculable. As the specific amount of time my Client put into pursuing this deal is unable to specifically be calculated we ask to be awarded appropriately by the Court.

We thank the Court for their time hearing us during this case, and ask the Court to find in favor of the plaintiff and award damages as requested.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance

According to the Contracts Act, a Breach of Contract occurs when "a party fails to fulfil its contractual obligations". The same act states, " Remedies for breach may include damages, specific performance, or other equitable relief." The Legal Damages Act authorizes Compensatory Damages as compensation; security or protection against a loss or other financial burden; or the restoration of something lost or stolen to its proper owner.

Your honor, this case has nothing to do with breach of contract as breach of contract charges were never filed against the defendant. Therefore the statement above said by the plaintiff is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance

Your Honor, we ask that the Defendant be held liable for failing to follow through on their obligations for this contract. The Defendant agreed to acquire my client's company, was given extension in excess of what the contract required to make good on their obligations, and ultimately failed to pay. The Defendant affirmed almost every single fact of this case with the exception that my client

Your honor, as previously said this case has nothing to do with breach of contract, no breach of contract charges have been brought against the defendant and the plaintiff is not pursuing a breach of contract charge against the defendnat. This case has nothing to do with "failing to follow through on their obligations for this contract." as that would constitute breach of contract which is not a factor in this case. Therefore the statement above said by the plaintiff is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance

Case law from similar proceedings support our claim for relief here. In the case lukeyyy v. Culls [2025] FCR 114 the Defendant failed to provide payment after signing a contract and was ordered to provide payment. In 12700k v. MattTheSavvy [2025] FCR 89 the Defendant similarly failed to fulfill their end of the contract by not providing payment and was found to be in breach of the contract.

Your honor, for a third time the plaintiff has broughten up breach of contract, no where in the filings of this case did the plaintiff bring charges of breach of contract against the defendant. Effectively this whole paragraph is an argument with example showing the awarding of damages for a BREACH OF CONTRACT charge not a charge of failure of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. Therefore the statement above said by the plaintiff is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance

We ask the Court to provide appropriate damages in line with the law and precedent.

Your honor, for a fourth time brings up this breach of contract charge that they have created out of thin air. This statement asks for the court to provide damages in line with the law and precedent. However the precedent the plaintiff is referring to is a precedent regarding a breach of contract charge that was mentioned in the defendant's third objection to the plaintiff's closing. Therefore the statement above said by the plaintiff is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

 

[RiggoSoft]

May I amend these objections your honor there seems to be a typo made by me

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance



Your honor, this case has nothing to do with breach of contract as breach of contract charges were never filed against the defendant. Therefore the statement above said by the defendant is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance



Your honor, as previously said this case has nothing to do with breach of contract, no breach of contract charges have been brought against the defendant and the plaintiff is not pursuing a breach of contract charge against the defendnat. This case has nothing to do with "failing to follow through on their obligations for this contract." as that would constitute breach of contract which is not a factor in this case. Therefore the statement above said by the defendant is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance



Your honor, for a third time the plaintiff has broughten up breach of contract, no where in the filings of this case did the plaintiff bring charges of breach of contract against the defendant. Effectively this whole paragraph is an argument with example showing the awarding of damages for a BREACH OF CONTRACT charge not a charge of failure of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. Therefore the statement above said by the defendant is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Relevance



Your honor, for a fourth time brings up this breach of contract charge that they have created out of thin air. This statement asks for the court to provide damages in line with the law and precedent. However the precedent the plaintiff is referring to is a precedent regarding a breach of contract charge that was mentioned in the defendant's third objection to the plaintiff's closing. Therefore the statement above said by the defendant is irrelevant, and the defense moves to strike the statement from the record.

 

[ko531]

May I amend these objections your honor there seems to be a typo made by me

Granted

 

[RiggoSoft]

There you are your honor feel free to rule on the objections whenever you are free

 

[Rookieblue14]

Response

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Raz0Baz0 v. vishy1x [2025] DCR 92

Your Honor, this is clearly a contracts case. The Defendant failed to provide the funds to complete the contract, which is a breach. According to the Contracts Act on Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, "Parties to a contract shall perform their respective duties and exercise their rights under the contract in good faith and in a manner that is fair and just." The evidence shows that the defendant failed to perform their respective duties in the contract, which is a breach of said contract. The evidence and case law provided supports this stance, are relevant to this case at hand, and should be allowed.

 

[Rookieblue14]

Your Honor, I mistakenly used the wrong case name in my responses, permission to correct this?

 

[RiggoSoft]

Response

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Raz0Baz0 v. vishy1x [2025] DCR 92

Your Honor, this is clearly a contracts case. The Defendant failed to provide the funds to complete the contract, which is a breach. According to the Contracts Act on Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, "Parties to a contract shall perform their respective duties and exercise their rights under the contract in good faith and in a manner that is fair and just." The evidence shows that the defendant failed to perform their respective duties in the contract, which is a breach of said contract. The evidence and case law provided supports this stance, are relevant to this case at hand, and should be allowed.

Your honor even if the plaintiff is arguing breach of contract is a violation of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, the case the plaintiff used was a decision based on a breach of contract charge not a failure to uphold the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing charge that was violated by the breach of contract.

 

[Rookieblue14]

Your honor even if the plaintiff is arguing breach of contract is a violation of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, the case the plaintiff used was a decision based on a breach of contract charge not a failure to uphold the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing charge that was violated by the breach of contract.

Objection

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
IgnitedTnT v. LeafLuxury LLC [2025] FCR 131
OBJECTION - Breach of Procedure

The Objection Guide states that "Objections are on a per matter issue. One Objection and one Counter is allowed per matter". This does not entitle the Defendant to an automatic response to the response to the objection. As such I ask this be struck from the record.