Lawsuit: Dismissed Silverdoller2 v. Olisaurs123 [2022] FCR 29

Featured Businesses

Status
Not open for further replies.

silverdoller2

Citizen
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
silverdoller2
silverdoller2
attorney
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Silverdoller2
Plaintiff

v.

Lemonade Inc (Olisaurs123)
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

Just over 2 Weeks ago, the Defendant granted the use of Plot C-385 for the Compony Warm & Cozy Emporium. The plot was actively built and completed within the 2 weeks required by the DCT stating “When a player buys a region in the city they have 2 weeks to start building something on it and should be making significant and regular progress.” The Plaintiff then left on a vacation and returned to the plot with removed access. The Plaintiff has put over 3,000 (Three-Thousand) Dollars into this plot with no access to it. The access has been removed without any warning, The plaintiffs offline mail was not notified, nor was the Plaintiffs Discord Direct Messages notified either. The plaintiff has had no reason to be evicted nor did they have reason for imitate eviction


I. PARTIES
1. Lemonade Inc
2. Olisaurs123



II. FACTS
1. Lemonade Inc gave Warm & Cozy Emporium Full use of the plot C-385 for Commercial Use
2. Warm & Cozy Emporium followed all laws of activity with no reason of eviction
3. Warm & Cozy Emporium’s Owner Silverdoller2 left for a one week vacation IRL on 4/01/2022
4. Warm & Cozy Emporium’s Owner Returned on 4/08/2022
5. Warm & Cozy Emporium's Owner Logged On to DC to find that all access to plot C-385 had been removed from him with all his possessions of the company inside.
6. Warm & Cozy Emporium is a loss if all assets are lost. The company will be forced to shut down.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Law 6.14 failure to disclose, The Defendant failed to provide any documentation as to why the Plaintiff was being Evicted
2. Law 7.2 Wrongful Eviction, The Defendant has had no clear reason for an eviction. No Law has been broken on the property that would result in an eviction by the DCT
3. 13.6 Trespassing, The landlord is given permission to enter the property in an Emergency situation, at this time the Plaintiff has no information that an Emergency Situation has happened. Proof is given below

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $2,760 (two-Thousand Seven-Hundred, Sixty Dollars), of lost profit while the access to the property has been removed
2. $300 (Three-Hundred) in Emotional Damages/Stress
3. $1500 (One-Thousand Five-Hundred) in lost stock that is unable to be harvested at this time.
4. Any Charges By Broken Laws


1. WackJap (witness)
2. Kitje_Kitje_NL (witness)

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 8th day of April 2022
 
Last edited:

silverdoller2

Citizen
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
silverdoller2
silverdoller2
attorney
1649449657823.png

Lost Profit
1649449717985.png

Bamboo Production

1649449743087.png

Sugar Cane Production
1649449786794.png

What Is left Of Stock on Bamboo
 

dygyee

Future Justice
Judge
Education & Commerce Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
dygyee
dygyee
judge
Due to recent issues that I've had with one of the parties, I will be recusing myself from this case and will let another judge or justice preside over this case.
 

JoeGamer

Justice
Justice
Public Affairs Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
1649709104769.png

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

Lemonade Inc is required to appear before the court in the case of the silverdoller2 v. Lemonade Inc. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

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.​
 

Olisaurus123

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
Olisaurus123
Olisaurus123
economist
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

The defense move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:
II. FACTS

1. Lemonade Inc gave Warm & Cozy Emporium Full use of the plot C-385 for Commercial Use

Partially agree. Defendant (Olisaurs123, not Lemonade Inc.) added Plaintiff to the C-385 plot as a friend to friend gesture, and to support a small business. Nowhere was it agreed upon that Plaintiff would retain rights to "full use" of the plot and nowhere was it agreed that Plaintiff would keep access to the plot permanently or however long Plaintiff wanted it.

2. Warm & Cozy Emporium followed all laws of activity with no reason for eviction

Irrelevant. This was not a landlord/tenant transaction, therefore eviction laws are not applicable to this scenario. Rather, Defendant informally added Plaintiff to the plot to provide them with a space to run their business.

3. Warm & Cozy Emporium’s Owner Silverdoller2 left for a one-week vacation IRL on 4/01/2022
4. Warm & Cozy Emporium’s Owner Returned on 4/08/2022


Acknowledge. Without any communication/warning, Plaintiff left the server with $0 in their account for a week. Defendant assumed that Plaintiff had quit the server, and subsequently unadded them to the plot. Had Plaintiff communicated their absence with Defendant, no action would have been taken at all.

5. Warm & Cozy Emporium's Owner Logged On to DC to find that all access to plot C-385 had been removed from him with all his possessions of the company inside.

Acknowledge that access to C-385 was revoked and possessions are still on the plot's premises. As chest shops have not been removed, the business was/is still operational since Plaintiff's unannounced departure.

6. Warm & Cozy Emporium is a loss if all assets are lost. The company will be forced to shut down.

Assets are not lost. Chest shops and supplies purchased by Plaintiff are still on the plot. Had Plaintiff messaged Defendant at any point prior to filing this case, Plaintiff would be aware that Defendant is open to returning all assets owned by Plaintiff.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. Law 6.14 failure to disclose, The Defendant failed to provide any documentation as to why the Plaintiff was being Evicted

Law 6.14 is applicable to landlord/tenant relationships. Insofar as this case deals with a "/as addfriend" and not a "/as rent" command, no documentation is necessary. At no point does the Plaintiff provide evidence that they were in possession (as a tenant or owner) of the property because it was simply never the case.

2. Law 7.2 Wrongful Eviction, Defendant has had no clear reason for an eviction. No Law has been broken on the property that would result in eviction by the DCT

See response above. Law 7.2 is applicable to landlord/tenant relationships. Insofar as this case deals with a "/as addfriend" and not a "/as rent" command, no documentation is necessary. No reason is needed to unadd a friend from a plot.

3. 13.6 Trespassing, The landlord is given permission to enter the property in an emergency situation, at this time the Plaintiff has no information that an Emergency Situation has happened. The proof is given below

Plaintiff was never the official landowner or tenant of C-385. Insofar as there, the Defendant was always the legal owner, trespassing on one's own plot is impossible.

DATED: 13/04/2022
 

JoeGamer

Justice
Justice
Public Affairs Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
I will be rejecting the motion to dismiss as it is more of a defense and does not point out any part of this case being frivolous. The plaintiff has 48 hours to provide an opening statement.

I'm not a witness.
Please do not talk in this court unless summoned. This is your final warning.
 

Olisaurus123

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
Olisaurus123
Olisaurus123
economist
Your honor, may I request an in-game trial?
 

Olisaurus123

Citizen
Education & Commerce Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
Olisaurus123
Olisaurus123
economist
If not may I please have an extension for my opening statement?
 

JoeGamer

Justice
Justice
Public Affairs Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
An in game proceeding of the Federal Court will proceed today (April 22, 2022) at 8pm Eastern Standard Time (6pm Central Standard Time) with the following docket order:

Silverdoller2 v. Olisaurs123 2022 [FCR] 29

Both parties should be in game at the appropriate time or they will be held in contempt.​
 

JoeGamer

Justice
Justice
Public Affairs Department
Redmont Bar Association
Donator
JoeGamer
JoeGamer
judge
Due to the plaintiff failing to appear to his own case, I will be holding silverdoller2 in direct contempt of this court. The DOJ is to fine the plaintiff $1,000 for wasting both the Federal Court time and the defendants.

I will being dismissing this case in favor of the defendant. The Federal Court is extremely disappointed in the actions of the plaintiff. Without any communication to the court, they did not show up on an agreed upon time. If there would have been communication to the court this could have been avoided. In game cases take a lot of time and effort and to simply abandon your own case without communication is simply unacceptable. The court will not stand for this abandonment of a case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top