Lawsuit: In Session ItzBananaMuffin v. PerfectedRylint [2021] DCR 77

BananaMuffinMC

Citizen
Magistrate
RBA
BananaMuffinMC
BananaMuffinMC
magistrate
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


ItzBananaMuffin
Plaintiff

v.

PerfectedRylint
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

After several lottery-type events by Icypenguin79, PerfectedRylint advertised the same thing and then failed to follow through when the terms were met.


I. PARTIES
1. ItzBananaMuffin (Plaintiff)
2. PerfectedRylint (Defendant)

II. FACTS
1. Icypenguin79 put up several lottery messages in the global chat wherein the first person to send a sum of money received the amount doubled.
2. The Plaintiff won two of these events, and Teuntje1234567 won another.
3. The Plaintiff won two $100 buy-in lotteries for $200 in rewards each, and Teuntje1234567 won a $1,000 buy-in, $2,000 reward lottery.
4. Several other of these lotteries appeared in chat, but the Plaintiff ignored these, as the risk-to-reward was too high, or he did not have enough for the buy-in.
5. The Defendant put a message in the chat advertising a lottery with the same terms as the one that Teuntje1234567 won.
6. The Plaintiff entered his $1,000, as seen in evidence exhibit 2.
7. The Defendant then claimed that they were only joking, and were not actually going to pay the reward.
8. The Defendant sent back the Plaintiff's money when the Plaintiff asked for the reward.
9. The Defendant acknowledged that the Plaintiff would have won the $2,000 reward.


III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Defendant knowingly asked for $1,000 in chat, never indicating that it was a joke, and never giving any reason to assume it was anything but a legitimate lottery, as had been done multiple times prior to this.
2. The Plaintiff logically accepted the risk of this proposition and put forward $1,000 of his own money.
3. The Defendant then retracted their verbal agreement after the Plaintiff had already paid.
4. The Defendant failed to pay the legally owed reward as a result of the lottery.
5. False advertising is defined as: "Any advertising or promotion that misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities or geographic origin of goods, services or commercial activities"
6. The Defendant misrepresented the nature of the lottery service, and as such the Plaintiff is legally entitled to compensation on the basis of false advertising.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $1,000 in the reward from the lottery
2. $100 in time costs, as the Plaintiff is an Attorney

The legitimate lotteries by Icypenguin79
1640370507442.png


The false advertising by PerfectedRylint
1640370539834.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 24th day of December, 2021
(Edited for capitalization of a name I had mistyped)
(Edited again to fix numbering, last one I swear)
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
District Court.png




IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@PerfectedRylint is required to appear before the court in the case of itzbananamuffin v. perfectedrylint [2021 DCR 77]. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​
 

PerfectedRylint

Citizen
Justice Department
PerfectedRylint
PerfectedRylint
traineeofficer
i would like an extention please. since its the holidays and spending time with family so i dont have moch time.
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
The Court will grant a 48 hour extension to the Defendant.

With this time, if the defendant needs legal counsel, i advise going to the RBA and requesting a public defender.

This court will reconvene on Tuesday, December 28th at 15:13 EST
 

BananaMuffinMC

Citizen
Magistrate
RBA
BananaMuffinMC
BananaMuffinMC
magistrate
Seeing as how we both have difficult situations with scheduling, I move to reconvene this court on the 2nd of January, if that would suit the Defendant as well. By this time, I will be back from visiting family, and I will be back at my normal level of activity. If not, then I will continue this suit, but my response times will be slower, so I thank everyone for their patience.
 

PerfectedRylint

Citizen
Justice Department
PerfectedRylint
PerfectedRylint
traineeofficer
Seeing as how we both have difficult situations with scheduling, I move to reconvene this court on the 2nd of January, if that would suit the Defendant as well. By this time, I will be back from visiting family, and I will be back at my normal level of activity. If not, then I will continue this suit, but my response times will be slower, so I thank everyone for their patience.
Yes I agree to that lol
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
This court is hereby in recess until January 2nd at 12pm EST.

If the defendant does not present a answer by then, I will have to proceed.
 

Chantiu

Citizen
Chantiu
Chantiu
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

ItzBananaMuffin
Plaintiff

v.

PerfectedRylint (Lovely Law Firm Representing)
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. Dispute:
The defendant clearly stated that it was a joke in the text below.

2. Dispute:
Being that the Plaintiff knowingly took this risk by giving random strangers money. This occurrence should not affect my client.

3. Dispute
The defendant never explicitly stated that they were not going to pay the Plaintiff.

4. Dispute
The defendant never promoted nor advertised that they were giving away any funds. They were merely copying what Icypenguin79 stated in a joining matter.



II. DEFENCES
The defendant was simply joking about the incident and was copying what Icypenguin79 state. My client should not be penalized for the Plantiff’s poor judgement. It is never good to send money to strangers. Especially since they never explicitly stated that they were doing a lottery.


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 2 day of January 2022
 

BananaMuffinMC

Citizen
Magistrate
RBA
BananaMuffinMC
BananaMuffinMC
magistrate
OPENING STATEMENT

This situation which we are about to discuss in detail occurred from a series of conscious decisions on the behalf of the Defendant. By making these decisions, they knowingly misled at least one person, and possibly others. The Defendant must thus logically be held accountable for their actions and words.

First, the Defendant took advantage of a legitimate system that existed at the time. Icypenguin established a communal trust that the lotteries they advertised were legitimate. In each instance, of which there were at least four, Icypenguin paid out the winnings as per their own stated rules. This did not break any laws, rules, or other regulations, and provided a game of speed and luck for players on the server. In a sense, these lotteries were fair, because everyone had a chance of winning if they could type fast enough.

In contrast, I present the Defendant’s actions. They put a similar message in the chat to one sent out by Icypenguin during the lotteries. There was no indication or message by the Defendant to tell anyone they were “joking” or were anything but completely serious about the lottery. Following a completely logical thought process, the Plaintiff decided to enter the lottery and try his hand, similar to how it had worked with Icypenguin’s. The Plaintiff thus put up his own money as a risk with the expectation that at least one person would receive the reward. The Plaintiff would have won, as confirmed by the Defendant later, but nothing was heard back for some time. Then, the Defendant claimed they were joking after they had already received the Plaintiff’s money. Only when the Plaintiff challenged them to pay, was his money returned. Despite wholeheartedly accepting the risk of losing the lottery, the Plaintiff put forward money towards what turned out to be the Defendant accepting no risk, but taking money. That type of exchange is a blatant failure to follow through on what was advertised and constitutes fraud.

In response to what the Defense would have to say about this exchange, I have the following comments.

First and foremost, the Defendant only stated that their comments were a joke after the Plaintiff had sent his money. They had plenty of time to declare their intentions before anyone put forth money.

If the risk of giving someone money lies entirely on the person giving the money, even when there is a spoken guarantee that something will be given back, then there is no protection against scams when selling anything via any method but a sell chest. This is completely ridiculous and an absurd rule to expect people to live by.

The Defendant paid back the Plaintiff’s original money but never what should have been paid. If their intentions were to, then why did they not? They certainly received enough of an opportunity to do so without litigation. This is merely an attempt to throw a red herring in the way of justice, and holds no real bearing on their actions.

As to the final point, there is a very serious instance of perjury presented here. The Defense has claimed that the Defendant never advertised or promoted the giving away of any funds. This is completely in contrast to the hard evidence as seen in the chat log. The Defendant stated specifically “send me 1k to get 2k”, in a global channel, for everyone on the server to see. The Defense has openly lied in their response to the lawsuit, as the Defendant promoted the exact exchange described above, and re-posted below with the comment underlined.

1641246228287.png
 

Chantiu

Citizen
Chantiu
Chantiu
I would like to request an extension as I am dealing with possible covid exposure. I need a few days to recuperate.
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
I will grant a 72 hour extension as I understand real life comes before game, although if you can not represent the defendent in a timely manner, it would be in the best interest of the defendant to seek new counsel.

This court adjourned until Monday at this time.
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
We will now be moving forward without the Defenses opening statement. Would the plaintiff like to call any witnesses?
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer

federal-court-png.12082


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

@Teuntje1234567 and @Icypenguin79 is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of itzBananamuffin v. PerfectedRylint. 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.​
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
Since the other witness has neglected to appear before this court, we will move on without them. @BananaMuffinMC may post their questions in one post.
 

BananaMuffinMC

Citizen
Magistrate
RBA
BananaMuffinMC
BananaMuffinMC
magistrate
Icypenguin79:
1. Did you sponsor a lottery-style giveaway in the global chat, wherein the first person to pay you money would receive a set sum in return?
There will be follow-up questions, which will be put into a single post if possible.
 

Teuntje1234567

Citizen
Administrator
Secretary
Construction & Transport Department
Environment & Recreation Department
Donator
Teuntje1234567
Teuntje1234567
environmentsec
Ope I didnt see that ping before, I am now present if I'm still needed.
 

BananaMuffinMC

Citizen
Magistrate
RBA
BananaMuffinMC
BananaMuffinMC
magistrate
For Teuntje1234567:
1. Did you participate in one or more lottery-style giveaways hosted by Icypenguin79?
2. If yes, did you receive your winnings as you expected to?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or illegitimacy in the message PerfectedRylint sent in global chat?
 

Icypenguin79

Citizen
Environment & Recreation Department
RBA
Icypenguin79
Icypenguin79
aventura-res
Icypenguin79:
1. Did you sponsor a lottery-style giveaway in the global chat, wherein the first person to pay you money would receive a set sum in return?
There will be follow-up questions, which will be put into a single post if possible.
Yes, I did sponsor such a giveaway.
 

BananaMuffinMC

Citizen
Magistrate
RBA
BananaMuffinMC
BananaMuffinMC
magistrate
Follow-up questions for Icypenguin79:
1. Did you, each and every time, pay out the winnings to the proper party?
2. Was the message sent by PerfectedRylint designed, in your opinion as a host of lotteries, to be the same type of system, where there would be at least one winner?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or being insincere in PerfectedRylint's message?
 

Icypenguin79

Citizen
Environment & Recreation Department
RBA
Icypenguin79
Icypenguin79
aventura-res
Follow-up questions for Icypenguin79:
1. Did you, each and every time, pay out the winnings to the proper party?
2. Was the message sent by PerfectedRylint designed, in your opinion as a host of lotteries, to be the same type of system, where there would be at least one winner?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or being insincere in PerfectedRylint's message?
Yes, I paid the appropriate winnings to the proper party each time I hosted such a lottery.

In my opinion, PerfectedRylint’s message was designed in an identical manner to mine, implying the same rules and procedure - where there is at least one winner.

I did not see any indication of joking or insincerity in his message.
 

Teuntje1234567

Citizen
Administrator
Secretary
Construction & Transport Department
Environment & Recreation Department
Donator
Teuntje1234567
Teuntje1234567
environmentsec
For Teuntje1234567:
1. Did you participate in one or more lottery-style giveaways hosted by Icypenguin79?
2. If yes, did you receive your winnings as you expected to?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or illegitimacy in the message PerfectedRylint sent in global chat?
1. Yes I did, iirc I participated in 2 or 3 of them.
2. I won all of the times I participated and received my price as promised.
3. I did not, they were advertising it the same way as Icypenguin79 did and they didnt make it either sound like a joke or make it clear in any way that it was.
 

JoeGamer

Citizen
Judge
Public Affairs Department
Donator
RBA
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
Seeing the presiding judge on this case has resigned, I will be presiding for the remainder of this case.

Does the defense wish to cross examine the witnesses?
 

JoeGamer

Citizen
Judge
Public Affairs Department
Donator
RBA
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
Mr. SumoMC, you may cross examine the witnesses. Please clearly label questions for specific witnesses if needed.
 

JoeGamer

Citizen
Judge
Public Affairs Department
Donator
RBA
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
1642606782252.png


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@BananaMuffinMC and @PerfectedRylint are hereby summoned to the District Court of Redmont in ItzBananaMuffin v. PerfectedRylint [2021] DCR 77 as witnesses. Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present. You will receive questions from the defense and may also be cross-examined.

I ask that the defense provides a list of all the questions they want answered by each witness in a single post. If some questions need to be withheld as they depend on answers given to earlier questions, that is also considered reasonable. When the defense is ready, you may ask questions to the witnesses. Then the plaintiff will be given the opportunity to cross-examine.

I am hereby informing each witness to ensure they are aware of the provisions of the law of perjury and its severity. Giving knowingly false testimony is highly illegal. Witnesses are required to tell the truth in their testimonies, pursuant to the Perjury Act.

Once the witnesses of the defense have been questioned and cross-examined, the court will proceed to closing statements.​
 

BananaMuffinMC

Citizen
Magistrate
RBA
BananaMuffinMC
BananaMuffinMC
magistrate
Your Honor, I object to my being called as a witness as I am, and am representing, the Plaintiff in this case, and it would thus be inappropriate to testify under the circumstances.
 

SumoMC

Citizen
Justice Department
Donator
RBA
xSumoMC
xSumoMC
traineeofficer
Your Honor,

The plaintiff is representing themselves, not allowing the defense to question the accuser would hender the defense from making a proper defense.
 

PerfectedRylint

Citizen
Justice Department
PerfectedRylint
PerfectedRylint
traineeofficer
View attachment 20888

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@BananaMuffinMC and @PerfectedRylint are hereby summoned to the District Court of Redmont in ItzBananaMuffin v. PerfectedRylint [2021] DCR 77 as witnesses. Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present. You will receive questions from the defense and may also be cross-examined.

I ask that the defense provides a list of all the questions they want answered by each witness in a single post. If some questions need to be withheld as they depend on answers given to earlier questions, that is also considered reasonable. When the defense is ready, you may ask questions to the witnesses. Then the plaintiff will be given the opportunity to cross-examine.

I am hereby informing each witness to ensure they are aware of the provisions of the law of perjury and its severity. Giving knowingly false testimony is highly illegal. Witnesses are required to tell the truth in their testimonies, pursuant to the Perjury Act.

Once the witnesses of the defense have been questioned and cross-examined, the court will proceed to closing statements.​
I am present
 

JoeGamer

Citizen
Judge
Public Affairs Department
Donator
RBA
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
Your Honor, I object to my being called as a witness as I am, and am representing, the Plaintiff in this case, and it would thus be inappropriate to testify under the circumstances.
After careful consideration, I have decide to overrule the objection. Mr. Sumo please ask your question to the witnesses.
 
Top