Lawsuit: In Session Luxor Casinos & Resorts v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2024] FCR 57

Dartanboy

Dartanboy

Citizen
President of the Senate
Senator
Homeland Security Department
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Aventura Resident
Dartanman
Dartanman
presidentofthesenate
Joined
May 10, 2022
Messages
1,112
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Luxor Casinos & Resorts (Solid Law Firm representing)
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

The Department of Commerce - an Executive Department - legislated new laws on April 19. This legislation affects the operation of public companies like Luxor, and Executive Departments do not have the authority to pass laws.

I. PARTIES
1. Luxor
2. Commonwealth of Redmont

II. FACTS
1. Luxor has been a publicly traded company on The Exchange since November 2023 [Exhibit A].
2. On April 19 2024, the Secretary of Commerce announced the Transparency in IPO Market Act [Exhibit B].
3. This Act says "This legislation underscores our commitment to ensuring transparency and accountability within financial markets. By mandating that all public companies register in the official DoC IPO Database, we aim to provide investors with comprehensive and reliable information essential for making informed investment decisions" [Exhibit C].
4. This Act creates a new law, mandating that all public companies are treated unequally under the law by requiring them to provide further information to the Government.
5. This Act refers to itself as "legislation" which only Congress can pass.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Executive Branch does not have the authority to pass new laws/legislation.
2. This particular law also treats public companies (and their Employees and Shareholders) unequally under the law, which is against the Constitution.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. The Act of the Executive be struck as unconstitutional.
2. The DoC issue a public apology for their overreach of power.
3. $2,500 in nominal damages.
4. $500 in legal fees made payable to SolidLawFirm (business in-game).

 EVIDENCE
1000006689.jpg

1000006691.jpg

Exhibit C: https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/transparency-in-ipo-market-act.21087/

Consent to Represent: I am the CEO of Luxor and Solid Law.

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 21st day of April 2024.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTION

I ask that Luxor not be required to fill out an application for the duration of this lawsuit.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO SUBMIT NEW EVIDENCE

I request the approval of Exhibit D into evidence.

1713794496121.png
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO SUBMIT NEW EVIDENCE

I request the approval of Exhibit E into evidence.

1713794587685.png
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO SUBMIT NEW EVIDENCE

I request the approval of Exhibit F into evidence.

1713795171361.png
 
Dartanboy said:
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTION

I ask that Luxor not be required to fill out an application for the duration of this lawsuit.
Click to expand...

The Emergency Injunction is hereby ACCEPTED. The Department of Commerce is ordered not to take any action pertaining to the IPO for the duration of the lawsuit.

Summons will be issued shortly.
 
FedCourtLogo.png

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS
@Dr_Eksplosive is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Luxor Casinos & Resorts V. The Commonwealth of Redmont

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.​
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT​

Luxor Casinos & Resorts
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

  1. The Commonwealth affirms that Luxor has been a publicly traded company on The Exchange since November 2023.

  2. The Commonwealth affirms that on April 19, 2024, the Secretary of Commerce announced the Transparency in IPO Market Act.

  3. The Commonwealth affirms that the Act says "This legislation underscores our commitment to ensuring transparency and accountability within financial markets. By mandating that all public companies register in the official DoC IPO Database, we aim to provide investors with comprehensive and reliable information essential for making informed investment decisions"

  4. The Commonwealth denies that this Act creates a new law but affirms it mandates all public companies to provide further information to the Government.

  5. The Commonwealth affirms that this Act refers to itself as "legislation".
II. DEFENSES

  1. Regarding fact four, the Commonwealth agrees that the DOC does not have the authority to create a new law. Therefore, we deny that this Act creates a new law because the DOC lacks the authority to do so.

  2. The Commonwealth agrees that this "Act" constituted an overstep on behalf of the DOC. While we believe the DOC has the authority to issue such requirements, the manner in which they did so was overstepping. We are currently working out of court with both the DOC and the plaintiff to resolve this matter. While we did not affirm all the facts presented, as one of them is simply impossible to be true, we remain open to a summary judgment.
By making this submission, I acknowledge and understand the consequences of lying in court and acknowledge that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement.

DATED: This 25th day of April 2024
 
We will now move on to the Discovery phase of the trial. Please provide any additional evidence or a list of witnesses within the next 7 days.
 
Question for the Defendant:
I'm not claiming it was an Act of Congress, but it is a law. Department policy is law, right? If not, please explain.
 
Department policy is not law; it is policy. Policy is a set of rules that a department or whoever establishes them follows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top