- Joined
- Apr 15, 2025
- Messages
- 57
- Thread Author
- #1
Case Filing
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
RemyTheRatta (represented by Atlas Legal & Learning Institute)
Plaintiff
v.
FlyingBlocks
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
I. Written statement from the plaintiff
II. Parties
a) RemyTheRatta
b) FlyingBlocks
III. Facts
- The Plaintiff, known as “RemyTheRatta,” is a commercial participant within the Commonwealth of Redmont, regularly engaging in lawful business operations through the use of chest shops.
- The Defendant, known as “FlyingBlocks,” is a resident of Redmont and was at the relevant times the owner and controller of the entire property C309, including floor 6. (See exhibit P-04 through P-06)
- On or about the 26th of May 2026 , the Plaintiff entered into a rental agreement with the Defendant for property C309 floor 6 through the Rent Region plugin system for a rental price of $1,000 and a fixed duration of thirty (30) days. (See exhibit P-11)
- The Plaintiff timely paid the required $1,000 rental fee in full through the automatic system and lawfully took possession of the property pursuant to the agreement.
- Following lawful possession of the property, the Plaintiff established and operated chest shops on the premises for legitimate commercial purposes.
- The Plaintiff invested substantial time, effort, and in-game assets into configuring, stocking, and maintaining the chest shop business located at C309 floor 6.
- The Plaintiff’s chest shop located at C309 floor 6 saw substantial income and traffic in the period in which it was operational, calculated here as $1,603.56 (See exhibit P-12 through P-25)
- On 29 May 2026, the Plaintiff was evicted from property C309 floor 6 and the Plaintiff’s items were subsequently placed into the in-game vault system. (See exhibit P-01 through P-03)
- Following the eviction, the Plaintiff opened a staff support ticket regarding the disappearance of the Plaintiff’s property and loss of access to the rented premises. (See exhibit P-01 through P-03)
- Within the staff ticket, the Plaintiff was informed by staff members that the Plaintiff’s items had been vaulted and that the Defendant had requested removal of the rental region associated with the property (See exhibit P-01 through P-03).
- The Defendant’s request to remove the rental region directly caused the Plaintiff’s eviction and dispossession from the rented property.
- At no point prior to the removal of the rental region did the Defendant provide the Plaintiff with any eviction notice or warning through Discord, the in-game mail system, forum direct messages, or any other communication platform customarily used within Democracy Craft. (See exhibit P-07 through P-10)
- The Plaintiff did not abandon the property, violate the rental agreement, or otherwise engage in conduct justifying immediate eviction.
- The Defendant failed to refund the Plaintiff’s $1,000 rental payment following the premature termination of the lease and removal of the rental region.
- The Defendant’s removal of the Plaintiff from the property occurred without procedural notice or opportunity for the Plaintiff to recover business operations prior to eviction. (See exhibit P-07 through P-10)
- Under the Tenant Rights Act, wrongful eviction is defined as "Evicting a tenant without reasonable notice or refund".
- The Defendant’s conduct constitutes wrongful eviction under the Tenant Rights Act because the Plaintiff was dispossessed from the rented property without notice or a refund despite maintaining an active and paid rental agreement.
- As a direct consequence of the eviction, the Plaintiff’s chest shop operations were interrupted and rendered inaccessible, causing immediate commercial losses.
- The Plaintiff lost substantial business revenue due to disruption of customer traffic, inability to continue operating at the established location, and forced closure of the shop during relocation efforts.
- In addition to direct financial losses, the Plaintiff was forced to relocate inventory, reconstruct chest shop infrastructure, and locate a new business location elsewhere within Redmont.
- This relocation process required substantial labor, time, and logistical effort on the part of the Plaintiff.
- The Plaintiff further suffered loss of enjoyment and disruption to ordinary gameplay within Redmont as a result of the sudden eviction and forced rebuilding of the business operation.
- The Defendant’s actions demonstrate reckless disregard for the rights guaranteed to tenants under the Tenant Rights Act.
- At the time of filing, the Defendant has neither restored possession of the property nor compensated the Plaintiff for lost rent, business interruption, or consequential damages.
- The Plaintiff further alleges that the Defendant’s conduct was outrageous, and sufficiently egregious to justify punitive damages in order to deter similar violations of tenant rights within Redmont.
IV. Claims of Relief
Breach of Contract
Under §7 of the Contracts Act. Plaintiff and Defendant formed a valid rental contract through the Sign-Rent plugin system. Plaintiff paid $1,000 to Defendant in exchange for the right to occupy and utilize property C309 for a fixed duration of thirty (30) days. The elements of a valid contract are clearly satisfied: offer, acceptance, consideration, mutual intent, and performance.
As with any rental agreement, there exists an inherent term under which the landlord must ensure the tenant’s continued possession and access to the rented premises for the duration of the lease term. A rental contract where a landlord may arbitrarily revoke access without notice or justification would defeat the purpose of the agreement entirely.
Defendant breached this inherent term by requesting removal of the rental region, which directly caused Plaintiff’s eviction from the property before expiration of the agreed rental period. At no point prior to the eviction did the Defendant provide notice through Discord, in-game mail, forum direct messages, or any other recognized communication channel within Redmont. The Plaintiff was not given an opportunity to cure any alleged violation, recover business operations, or prepare for relocation prior to eviction. This conduct squarely falls within the definition of wrongful eviction under the Tenant Rights Act.
As a direct result of the Defendant’s unlawful actions, the Plaintiff suffered damages including loss of the remaining rental value, interruption of commercial operations, and substantial consequential harm.
Breach of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
Further to the direct breach of contract alleged above, Defendant breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under §14 of the Contracts Act.
It is neither good faith nor fair dealing for a landlord to terminate the tenant’s possession without notice, warning, or procedural safeguards. Defendant interfered with Plaintiff’s lawful possession despite the existence of an active and paid lease agreement.
The Defendant’s actions demonstrate reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s contractual and property rights.
Wrongful Eviction
Defendant’s actions constitute wrongful eviction under the Tenant Rights Act. Plaintiff lawfully possessed property C309 floor 6 pursuant to a valid rental agreement and maintained active commercial operations on the premises.
On 29 May 2026, Defendant requested removal of the rental region, causing Plaintiff to lose access to the property. Plaintiff was given no notice through Discord, the in-game mail system, forum direct messages, or any other recognized communication platform prior to eviction.
Until staff intervention clarified the circumstances of the removal, Plaintiff was entirely clueless of the nature of the eviction. This constitutes constructive and actual eviction in violation of Plaintiff’s statutory tenant rights.
Interference with Commercial Relations and Business Operations
Plaintiff further alleges unlawful interference with legitimate commercial activity. Plaintiff operated lawful chest shop businesses from property C309 floor 6 and relied on continued possession of the premises to maintain customer access and revenue flow.
By wrongfully removing Plaintiff from the property without notice, Defendant interfered with Plaintiff’s ongoing commercial operations. This interference disrupted customer transactions, halted revenue generation, and forced closure and relocation of the Plaintiff’s business.
Plaintiff estimates business interruption damages at approximately $17,644.93. Calculated through adding up the income of the first 2.5 days found in exhibits P-12 through P-25, this sum being $1,603.56 and representing an approximate 8.33% of the total income of the 30 day period. Considering that the lost business would be constant to that shown in P-12 through P-25, the remaining 91.66% would amount to $17,644.93. Calculated as (1,603.56*91.66)/8.33
Outrageous Conduct and Punitive Damages
Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant’s conduct was outrageous and demonstrated flagrant disregard for Plaintiff’s contractual, commercial, and property rights.
It is unacceptable for Defendant to breach a valid thirty-day rental contract by terminating Plaintiff’s possession without notice or lawful process. These actions caused substantial financial harm, business interruption, and significant inconvenience to Plaintiff.
Such conduct warrants punitive damages due to it reflecting a disregard for tenant protections and basic principles of fair dealing within Redmont. Without punitive relief, similar arbitrary and abusive conduct by landlords may continue unchecked.
V. Prayer of Relief
Compensatory Damages for Wrongful Eviction and Breach of Contract:
Defendant breached a valid rental agreement and wrongfully evicted Plaintiff from property C309 floor 6 before expiration of the agreed thirty-day lease term. As a direct consequence of this conduct, Plaintiff suffered substantial financial harm and business interruption.
Plaintiff therefore seeks compensatory damages in the amount of $18,644.93, consisting of:
$1,000 for reimbursement of rent paid for the unusable tenancy.
$17,644.93 for lost business revenue and interruption of chest shop operations. Calculated by the means stated in claims of relief section IV.
Consequential Damages:
As a direct and foreseeable consequence of Defendant’s wrongful eviction and breach of contract, Plaintiff suffered substantial consequential damages beyond immediate financial losses. Following removal from property C309 floor 6, Plaintiff was forced to relocate inventory, transport materials, reconstruct chest shop infrastructure, and secure a new location to continue business operations.
This process required significant time, labor, and disruption to Plaintiff’s ordinary gameplay activities within Redmont. Plaintiff additionally suffered loss of enjoyment due to the abrupt termination of the tenancy, interruption of ongoing projects, and the burden associated with rebuilding an established commercial operation from the ground up.
Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks $19,000 in consequential damages.
Punitive Damages:
Defendant’s conduct in this matter was not a minor contractual dispute or accidental inconvenience. Defendant caused Plaintiff to be removed from a validly rented property during an active thirty-day tenancy without notice, lawful process, or procedural fairness. As a direct result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff lost access to an established chest shop business, suffered interruption of commercial operations, and was forced to relocate and reconstruct the business elsewhere within Redmont.
Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks $24,000 in punitive damages. This amount reflects the severity of Defendant’s conduct, the disruption caused to Plaintiff’s business and gameplay experience, and the need to deter similar violations of tenant rights in the future.
Legal Fees:
Pursuant to the Redmont Civil Code Act, the Plaintiff seeks legal fees, to be paid to Atlas Legal & Learning Institute, in the amount of 30% of the total awarded relief, or no less than $3,000, to cover attorney costs and filing expenses associated with this action.
VI. Evidence
Exhibit P-01, P-02 & P-03
Screenshots of the plaintiff’s ticket with staff.
Exhibit P-04, P-05 & P-06
Proof of ownership of C309 by Flying Blocks during and after the events in question.
Exhibit P-07, P-08, P-09 & P-10
Screenshots of the plaintiff’s various communication channels with the defendant, showing no attempt at an eviction notice by the latter.
Exhibit P-11
Proof of renting C309 floor 6 (region changed name to WWW20206 after being removed)
Exhibit P-12, P-13, P-14, P-15, P-16, P-17, P-18, P-19, P-20, P-21, P-22, P-23, P-24 & P-25
Screenshots of chest shop sales history (P-25 includes sales from the Plaintiff’s new chest shop, these sales begin at 14h 24min, all sales before this are from the chest shop in C309 floor 6)
VII. Witness List
- Staff
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 30th day of May 2026
Last edited: