Lawsuit: Pending RainbowHorsecake v. Commonwealth of Redmont

[Parry]

Case Filing

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


RainbowHorsecake
Plaintiff (representing pro se)

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

I was fined $500 for filing a Frivolous Government Application to the DOE. My application was made with genuine intent; as such, I would like to contest the charge before a judicial officer.

I. PARTIES​

1. RainbowHorsecake
2. Commonwealth of Redmont

II. FACTS​

1. On July 21, 2026, at 3:27 PM ET, Acting DOE Secetary Incarnation__ put out the following announcement in the DemocracyCraft Discord server #government-announcements channel: “We currently have someone who is able and willing to train new professors, considering most of the people who know how to do professor work is gone, this LITERALLY might be your best and last chance to become a professor. Come apply if you aren't a professor yet!” (P-001)
2. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff filed a Professor application on July 21, 2026, at 5:24 PM ET. (P-002)
3. Plaintiff was in active employment by the DOE as a guide prior to this application, through a separate Guide application that Plaintiff fully completed. (P-003)
4. This Professor application was accepted by Acting DOE Secretary Incarnation__, and the Plaintiff was subsequently given DOE roles. (P-002)
5. Plaintiff was fined $500 for this application on August 4, 2026. (P-004)
6. This fine came about as the Professor application was later reviewed to be a frivolous government application. (P-005)
7. Plaintiff denies that said government application is frivolous.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF​

1. Jurisdiction
The Redmont Civil Code Act (RCCA), Part II, §7(5) states: “Administrative Violation means a regulatory breach enforced by a government entity through an immediate penalty, without the need for a formal trial. This can be contested before a judicial officer after enforcement.”

Under the RCCA, Part XIII, §10, the violation “Frivolous Government Application” under which the Plaintiff received a fine is an Administrative Violation. The violation has also been enforced, as a corresponding $500 fine was issued against the Plaintiff. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to contest the violation before a judicial officer. The Constitution backs this interpretation, with §35(4) providing: “All accused are entitled to appeal a charge made against them by the state.”

Plaintiff finds himself in a strange position wherein the RCCA does not actually provide the means by which to contest an Administrative Violation. As such, Plaintiff has made this filing as a civil suit, noting that an appeal would not be proper as the typical appeal format presumes a decision has already been made by a lower court, yet no such decision has been made. Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court inform him should this filing be more appropriate as an appeal in the DCR/FCR.

2. Application Was Not Frivolous
The RCCA, Part XII, §10 provides:

10. Frivolous Government Application
Violation Type: Administrative
Remedy: Up to 5 Civil Penalty Units
A person commits a violation if the person:
(a) creates a government job or expression of interest application without genuine intent.

A frivolous government application primarily requires a “lack of genuine intent”; notably, not a “lack of completion” or “lack of sufficient effort as decided by a future department secretary.” Plaintiff denies that he lacked “genuine intent” when filling out his Professor application, and notes that the burden of proof lies on the Commonwealth to prove said violation with “clear and convincing evidence,” pursuant to the RCCA, Part II, §9(5).

In support thereof, Plaintiff points to the fact that Acting DOE Secretary Incarnation__ urged individuals to “Come apply if you aren't a professor yet!” only some hours before the Plaintiff filed his application, and that the Plaintiff’s application was accepted(!) Regardless of whether or not Plaintiff answered every question on the Professor application, there was clearly a genuine intent to become a professor, as evinced by this timing, the acceptance of the Plaintiff’s application, and the Plaintiff’s prior position as Guide within the DOE.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF​

The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Reversal of the violation and corresponding fine
2. One crisp Redmontian dollar as nominative damages
3. $3,000 in legal fees

V. EVIDENCE​

Spoiler: P-001

Spoiler: P-002

Spoiler: P-003

Spoiler: P-004

Spoiler: P-005

VI. WITNESSES​

1. RainbowHorsecake
2. Incarnation__

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 4th day of August 2026