Lawsuit: Dismissed Lynx v. The Hoard Company [2022] DCR 22

Status
Not open for further replies.

avelanie

Citizen
Supporter
avelanie
avelanie
donator1
Joined
Apr 17, 2022
Messages
425
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Lynx (Platinum Law Firm representing)
Plaintiff

v.

The Hoard Company
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: On April 3rd, Plaintiff and Defendant came to an agreement that Defendant would supply Plaintiff with 2 (two) full Shulker boxes of bone blocks (54 stacks in total).
Defendant did not meet this agreement as they had not provided Plaintiff with the 2 (two) shulker boxes of bone blocks.
The first agreed price was $1,000 when the agreement was made, and on the 23rd of April, Defendant changed the price to $2,000.
The Defendant ended up canceling the order, as they had gotten a higher bid for the 2 shulkers of bone blocks.

I. PARTIES
1. Lynx
2. The Hoard Company

II. FACTS
1. Plaintiff and Defendant came to an agreement that Defendant would provide 2 (two) full shulker boxes full of bone blocks
2. Defendant was supposed to provide the shulker boxes within (x days)
3. Due to Defendant not providing the shulkers as agreed, Plaintiff has lost $2,000 (two-thousand dollars) in loss of profits.
4. The defendant changed the price of the item after having agreed on a price already, starting the price at $1,000 and when asked again, changing it to $2,000.
5. Defendant canceled the order due to them having a higher bid on the selling item.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Defendant did not uphold what they promised when they entered the agreement with Plaintiff, and therefore broke an agreement between the two parties.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $2,000 in loss of profit, as this is what Plaintiffs client was gonna pay for the shulkers
2. $500 in lawyer fees

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 25 day of May 2022
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    73.8 KB · Views: 93
  • 7.png
    7.png
    100.7 KB · Views: 109
  • 6.png
    6.png
    99.8 KB · Views: 76
  • 5.png
    5.png
    85.3 KB · Views: 92
  • 4.png
    4.png
    72.2 KB · Views: 87
  • 3.png
    3.png
    85.1 KB · Views: 83
  • 2.png
    2.png
    80.4 KB · Views: 86
  • 8.png
    8.png
    101.4 KB · Views: 107
Before initial summonsing is sent out, it is required to provide the court proof of representation. Please submit to the courts a document supporting such an agreement.​
 
Here we go
 

Attachments

  • 1653649983186.png
    1653649983186.png
    10.9 KB · Views: 77
1652428459025.png




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

The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of Lynx v. The Hoard Company. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment.

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.​
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

Lynx (Platinum Law Firm representing)
Plaintiff

v.

The Hoard Company (Redmont Law Firm representing)
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS

1. I wish to bring forward the fact no agreement for the timeframe for this to be completed was formed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, if you view the first screenshot there is no ‘The hoard Company agrees to supply shulker/s of bone blocks and if failed have a change to be rightfully sued within a week’’ or anything of that nature.

2. Under II. FACTS, 4., it is declared that ‘The defendant changed the price of the item after having agreed on a price already, starting the price at $1,000 and when asked again, changing it to $2,000.’ When you examine the first provided screenshot, AlexThelilLion clearly mentions that one shulker is $1000 (one-thousand dollars).

A. Also to add to that, half of 54 (what is the number mentioned by AlexthelilLion) is 27, which is the space a shulker has. Ultimately AlexthelilLion was confirming to the 54 and then announcing he already had half of the order within a shulker that was priced at $1000 (one-thousand dollars). 2 shulkers worth $1000 (one-thousand dollars) each would be $2000 (two-thousand dollars) hence making the claim that they upped the price untrue.

Dated: 29/05/22
 
Your Honour, I will continue to represent Lynx on behalf of the Platinum Law Firm because IRL issues popped up for avelanie. May I post a rebuttal?
 
Last edited:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

Lynx (Platinum Law Firm representing)
Plaintiff

v.

The Hoard Company (Redmont Law Firm representing)
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS

1. I wish to bring forward the fact no agreement for the timeframe for this to be completed was formed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, if you view the first screenshot there is no ‘The hoard Company agrees to supply shulker/s of bone blocks and if failed have a change to be rightfully sued within a week’’ or anything of that nature.

2. Under II. FACTS, 4., it is declared that ‘The defendant changed the price of the item after having agreed on a price already, starting the price at $1,000 and when asked again, changing it to $2,000.’ When you examine the first provided screenshot, AlexThelilLion clearly mentions that one shulker is $1000 (one-thousand dollars).

A. Also to add to that, half of 54 (what is the number mentioned by AlexthelilLion) is 27, which is the space a shulker has. Ultimately AlexthelilLion was confirming to the 54 and then announcing he already had half of the order within a shulker that was priced at $1000 (one-thousand dollars). 2 shulkers worth $1000 (one-thousand dollars) each would be $2000 (two-thousand dollars) hence making the claim that they upped the price untrue.

Dated: 29/05/22
I will require proof of representation for the court record before I am able to rule on your request.
 
Your Honour, I will continue to represent Lynx on behalf of the Platinum Law Firm because IRL issues popped up for avelanie. May I post a rebuttal?
The change has been noted by the court.
 
I will require proof of representation for the court record before I am able to rule on your request.
Here you go, your honour.
 

Attachments

  • F31826D2-8492-4385-A118-084E42211635.jpeg
    F31826D2-8492-4385-A118-084E42211635.jpeg
    89.5 KB · Views: 59

Verdict


I will be accepting the motion to dismiss

I. THE COURT UNDERSTANDING

1. While there is an apparent attempt in making a contract between two or more parties the criteria of a defined contract is lacking. In accordance with the CLF all criteria must be present in order for it to be recognized as a valid contract.
2. While there are foundations to a contract displayed within the presumed ticket it appears the articles of text exchanged between both parties never surpassed the offer phase as defined within the CLF.
3. The plaintiff actioned what is defined under the CLF to be a "Request of Tender" as defined as a request of offers, in direct relation to asking for the pricing of the defined job.
4. As the contract was never fully actioned the defendant actioned their right of "Termination of offer" as defined under the CLF to withdraw support of the offer as another offer was presented to the defendant.

It is the recommendation to both parties that contract law is to be followed closely. If the contract does not uphold the terms defined, the contract cannot be given the ability to be upheld within the court of law.

The District Court thanks all involved.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top