Lawsuit: In Session Le9endz_ v. AussieBloke25 [2026] DCR 59

L

Le9endz_

Citizen
Le9endz_
Le9endz_
Solicitor
Joined
May 27, 2026
Messages
4
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Le9endz_(Self Represented)
Plaintiff

v.

AussieBloke25
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I was at the airport thinking of where to go when all of a sudden AussiBloke25 ran to the entrance of the airport and began shooting at people with his firearm. Many people died(including me) but it all happened so fast I couldn't proccess what just happened. After I died I called 911 and then called then returned to the airport only to be killed again(as seen in the video). I had also called the Police to the airport but no one came.


I. PARTIES
1. Le9endz_(Plaintiff)
2. AussieBloke25(Defendant)
3. Governemnt

II. FACTS
1. Le9endz_ was at the airport
2. AussieBloke25 came from the road.
3. AussieBloke25 had killed many people
4. AussieBloke25 (supposedly) left after no one was there anymore.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Tort of Wrongful Death: The Defendant executed multiple intentional, unprovoked PvP executions against the Plaintiff in a designated non-PvP roleplay zone (the airport), directly violating the fundamental protections of Redmont common law.
2. Tort of Wrongful Property Deprivation: The Defendant’s actions caused an illegal and involuntary transfer of the Plaintiff's active inventory items upon death, causing immediate economic harm.
3. Loss of Enjoyment under the Legal Damages Act:
1. (a) Pursuant to Section III of the Legal Damages Act, "Loss of Enjoyment" is legally defined as situations where an injured party has "diminished, their ability to engage in certain activities in the way that the injured party did before the harm."
2. (b) The Defendant purposefully camped a major public transit hub to repeatedly execute the Plaintiff, which directly and entirely stripped away the Plaintiff's ability to participate in server life "beyond conventional gameplay mechanics."
3. (c) In accordance with established judicial precedent within the Commonwealth of Redmont, egregious and continuous targeted harassment disrupting core gameplay loop metrics warrants a non-pecuniary compensation award of $25,000.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $5000 from the court due to Government and Police negligence.
2. $5000 from the defendant due to lack of enjoyment.
3. $10000 from the defendant due to killing Le9endz_ twice.


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 27 day of February 2026

Video Evidence: Watch IMG_3150 | Streamable
 

Writ of Summons


The Commonwealth of Redmont (cc: @Superwoops) and AussieBloke25 are ordered to appear before the District Court in the case of Le9endz_ v. AussieBloke25 [2026] DCR 59.

Failure to appear within 72 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.

 
MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT

Your Honour, The Plaintiff recognizes the technical error in the initial filing. I hereby move to amend the complaint, changing the charge from "Murder" to the correct civil equivalent of **Wrongful Death**. The facts of the case remain completely identical: the Defendant unlawfully caused the death of the Plaintiff, resulting in a loss of health, items, and severe financial damages. Because this is a simple correction of terminology and was not filed with malicious intent, I respectfully request that the court deny any third-party requests to charge the Plaintiff with a frivolous lawsuit.
 
Franciscus said:

Writ of Summons


The Commonwealth of Redmont (cc: @Superwoops) and AussieBloke25 are ordered to appear before the District Court in the case of Le9endz_ v. AussieBloke25 [2026] DCR 59.

Failure to appear within 72 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.

Click to expand...
The Commonwealth is present.
 
Superwoops said:
The Commonwealth is present.
Click to expand...
The Commonwealth is named as a party and has been summonsed on that basis. The Commonwealth shall be permitted 48 hours to brief the Court on whether or not the Commonwealth ought be joined to this case based on the factual allegations and claims for relief presented. Plaintiff will have 48 hours thereafter to respond to the brief.

Commonwealth’s brief need not be an answer to complaint; such would only be required should the Commonwealth be ordered joined by this Court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top