- Joined
- May 25, 2026
- Messages
- 20
- Thread Author
- #1
Case Filing
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
MegaMango800 (Represented by Theory, Talion and Partners Inc.)
Plaintiff
v.
Ebborsnam
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES
1. MegaMango800 (Plaintiff)
2. Ebborsnam (Defendant)
II. FACTS
1. On August 18th, 2026, the Defendant created an auction for two elytras. (P-001)
2. On August 19th, 2026, the Plaintiff posted the winning bid of $4,000. (P-002)
3. On August 20th, 2026, the Defendant confirmed that the Plaintiff had won the auction. (P-002)
4. On August 27th, 2026, the Defendant reaffirmed his promise to give the items to the Plaintiff (P-003)
5. On September 7th, 2026, the DOC posted a notice of the Defendants failure to deliver the auctioned item. (P-004)
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Breach of Contract (RCCA Part VI § 1)
Breach of Contract, as defined by Part VI § 1(a) of the RCCA, occurs when an individual
Under § 4 of the Contracts Act, a contract requires each of the following elements: offer, acceptance, consideration, intent, and capacity. Each of these elements is present in this instance. The Defendant posting the auction is a clear offer, the Plaintiff placing a bid would be acceptance, the $4,000 from the Plaintiff and the two elytras from the Defendant would be classified as consideration, intent is apparent given the context of this being a deliberately posted auction and an intentionally placed bid, and there is no apparent reason to doubt the capacity of either party to enter into this content. The Defendant has repeatedly shown their understanding of the terms, most notably through his vow to deliver the items in a timely manner. This establishes that a valid and enforceable contract was, in fact, formed. The Defendant's breach of the contract would be the other required element for Breach of Contract. The Defendant has admitted to being unable to deliver the elytra within the expected time period, which clearly establishes a breach.
2. Failure to Deliver Goods and Services (RCCA Part VI § 4)
Part VI § 4(a) of the RCCA defines Failure to Deliver Goods or Services as occurring when a person:
This requires three primary elements: a failure to deliver goods, a valid contract, and the lack of a lawful excuse. Both the validity of the contract and the failure to deliver goods have been established above. A lawful excuse has not been communicated by the Defendant, nor have attempts been made to mitigate the harm.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. A Specific Performance order requiring the Defendant to promptly deliver the two elytras to the Plaintiff, under Claim 1: Failure to Deliver Goods and Services. In the alternative, should the Specific Performance order fail to be granted by the Court or be otherwise made impossible, the Plaintiff seeks $4,000 in Compensatory Damages
2. $3,000 in Legal Fees, the minimum permitted sum under Part III § 7 of the RCCA, awarded to Theory, Talion and Partners Inc.
V. EVIDENCE
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 19th day of September 2026
@CreeperTD shall serve as the Lead Counsel for this case, with @00f3 serving as Co-counsel.