Lawsuit: Pending SimplifiedMax v. L4ndaakk [2026] DCR 28

[Capt11543]

Case Filing

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


SimplifiedMax
Plaintiff

v.

L4ndaakk
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

This is a straightforward breach of contract case. My client, SimplifiedMax, entered into a contract with the defendant wherein he agreed $10,000 for a gold drill that he never received. We are seeking damages and a specific performance order.

I. PARTIES

1. SimplifiedMax, Plaintiff
2. L4ndaakk, Defendant

II. FACTS

1. On February 24, 2026, Plaintiff agreed to pay Defendant $10,000 in exchange for a gold drill. See P-001.
2. During their conversation, Plaintiff sent Defendant the promised $10,000 payment. See P-002.
3. Defendant then sent Plaintiff a package through the in-game parcel service, leading Plaintiff to believe he had sent the drill as promised. See P-003.
4. The parcel Defendant sent actually contained a single potato.
5. To date, Plaintiff has not received a gold drill from Defendant.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. The agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant to exchange $10,000 for a gold drill constitutes a contract. See Contracts Act §4.
2. Plaintiff upheld their obligation by paying the $10,000. Defendant failed to uphold their obligation by delivering a potato instead of a gold drill. Therefore, Defendant breached the contract. See Contracts Act §7.
3. Plaintiff suffered direct financial losses because Defendant failed to deliver the product as promised, even after Plaintiff sent the $10,000 payment. Plaintiff did not receive the item they agreed to purchase for that price.
4. Because the contract involved the sale of a good, Defendant committed the specific civil violation of Failure to Deliver Goods. See Redmont Civil Code Act, Part VI, §4.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Pursuant to Redmont Civil Code Act, Part VI, §4, Plaintiff is seeking the following relief from Defendant:

1. Monetary damages of $20,000 (200 Civil Penalty Units).
2. A specific performance order to uphold their obligation and deliver the gold drill. If Defendant does not have a gold drill, Plaintiff seeks a written apology from Defendant instead.

V. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001

Spoiler: P-002

Spoiler: P-003

VI. OATH
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 6th day of March 2026

 

[dearev]

Writ of Summons

@L4ndaakk, is required to appear before the District Court in the case of SimplifiedMax v. L4ndaakk [2026] DCR 28

Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.

 

[Capt11543]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT

Your Honor, it has been over 72 hours since the Defendant was summoned to this case. Since the Defendant has not appeared, this Court should grant default judgement in this case.

DATED: This 19th day of March, 2026

 

[Franciscus]

Hopping in here as new presiding officer.

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT

Your Honor, it has been over 72 hours since the Defendant was summoned to this case. Since the Defendant has not appeared, this Court should grant default judgement in this case.

DATED: This 19th day of March, 2026

Denied. A public defender will be appointed. (CC: @Smallfries )

 

[gribble19]

I am present as a Public Defender representing Defendant in this matter, your Honour.

 

[Franciscus]

I am present as a Public Defender representing Defendant in this matter, your Honour.

Excellent. You have 48 hours to enter an answer to complaint.

 

[Capt11543]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE
Your Honor, the Defense counsel has reached out to us to begin settlement talks, which we have been happy to oblige. However, my client's involvement in these negotiations is directly required at this point, and my client happens to be on vacation and completely unreachable at this time.

Plaintiff's Counsel would hate to see otherwise productive settlement talks scuttled by hard procedural deadlines, nor do we want the Defense Counsel to be punished for a late filing when they reached out in good faith to negotiate a settlement and the delay is on our side.

My client is scheduled to return on April 1 and would then be available to participate in the settlement negotiations.

We therefore respectfully move that this Court:

• Stay the proceedings until the Plaintiff returns from vacation, and can participate in settlement negotiations; and
• Grant the Defense a 31-hour extension on any filing deadlines they are facing in this case.

 

[Franciscus]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE
Your Honor, the Defense counsel has reached out to us to begin settlement talks, which we have been happy to oblige. However, my client's involvement in these negotiations is directly required at this point, and my client happens to be on vacation and completely unreachable at this time.

Plaintiff's Counsel would hate to see otherwise productive settlement talks scuttled by hard procedural deadlines, nor do we want the Defense Counsel to be punished for a late filing when they reached out in good faith to negotiate a settlement and the delay is on our side.

My client is scheduled to return on April 1 and would then be available to participate in the settlement negotiations.

We therefore respectfully move that this Court:

• Stay the proceedings until the Plaintiff returns from vacation, and can participate in settlement negotiations; and
• Grant the Defense a 31-hour extension on any filing deadlines they are facing in this case.

Motions for continuance aren’t really a thing in Redmont; you can just ask respectfully for an extension. The Court therefore just will treat this as an extension request rather than a formal motion.

On the extension request; the extension would be to a deadline of the defense, so I don’t see any reason to approve unless the Defense were to ask for one/confirm that they want this—plaintiff is not prejudiced by defendant timely providing an answer to complaint.

@gribble19 Has the defense agreed to seek this extension, or does the Defense prefer the original deadline?

 

[gribble19]

Your Honor, the Defendant would like to thank the Plaintiff for their concern and appreciates their filing, however we do not require an extension at this time.

 

[gribble19]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

SimplifiedMax
Plaintiff

v.

L4ndaakk
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The Defendant AFFIRMS that on February 24, 2026, Plaintiff agreed to pay Defendant $10,000 in exchange for a gold drill.
2. The Defendant AFFIRMS that during their conversation, Plaintiff sent Defendant the promised $10,000 payment.
3. The Defendant AFFIRMS that defendant then sent Plaintiff a package through the in-game parcel service. The Defendant NEITHER AFFIRMS NOR DENIES whether this led Plaintiff to believe he had sent the drill as promised.
4. The Defendant DENIES that the parcel Defendant sent actually contained a single potato.
5. The Defendant DENIES that to date, Plaintiff has not received a gold drill from Defendant.

II. DEFENCES
1. The Judicial Standards Act in Part II, §3.1.a states that the Balance of Probabilities is the standard of proof that is required in civil proceedings.
2. There is not enough evidence to support the claim that the Defendant sent a potato instead of a gold drill on a balance of probabilities.
3. There is not enough evidence to support the claim that the Defendant has not received a gold drill from the Defendant on a balance of probabilities.

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 twenty-ninth day of March 2026.

 

[Franciscus]

Discovery is open from the time of the posting of this message and shall remain until 5 days (120 hours) pass thereafter.

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
DISCOVERY SUBMISSION

Your Honor, the Plaintiff submits evidence of his last login time.

Spoiler: P-004

Respectfully submitted,
Capt B. Numbers
Plaintiff's Counsel

 

[SimplifiedMax]

I am currently in Mexico and have no access to any device, I am currently using my dad’s phone. I will retry in 2 days.

 

[Franciscus]

I am currently in Mexico and have no access to any device, I am currently using my dad’s phone. I will retry in 2 days.

Is there anything you’d like to ask of the Court in this filing? (CC: @Capt11543 )

 

[SimplifiedMax]

I am now back home and can now answer and participate in this lawsuit activly.

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY EXTENSION

Your Honor, as you can see from the court record, my client has returned and we have been in contact.

We are still gathering information which is necessary for the case. I had hoped that despite my client being unreachable until partway through discovery, we would be able to get everything we needed, but it now looks like we will certainly need more time.

Plaintiff's Counsel humbly requests an extension of Discovery of 24 to 48 hours.

Respectfully Submitted,
Capt11543
Plaintiff's Counsel

 

[Franciscus]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY EXTENSION

Your Honor, as you can see from the court record, my client has returned and we have been in contact.

We are still gathering information which is necessary for the case. I had hoped that despite my client being unreachable until partway through discovery, we would be able to get everything we needed, but it now looks like we will certainly need more time.

Plaintiff's Counsel humbly requests an extension of Discovery of 24 to 48 hours.

Respectfully Submitted,
Capt11543
Plaintiff's Counsel

Granted. Discovery shall be extended by 24 hours from its previous deadline.

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
SUBMISSION OF DISCOVERY

With gratitude to the Court for the extension, the Plaintiff submits the following evidence to the record:

Spoiler: P-005

The contents of the Plaintiff's inventory, and all of their regularly used storage containers (four shulker boxes).

Spoiler: P-006

The transaction history of the Plaintiff going back to the purchase of the golden drill.

Spoiler: P-007

A valuable weapon which was purchased by the Plaintiff for $6,600 from a third party.

Spoiler: P-008

The output of the command /firm list SimplifiedMax, showing that the Plaintiff has no business balances.

 

[Capt11543]

Case Filing

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


SimplifiedMax
Plaintiff

v.

L4ndaakk
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF



I. PARTIES

1. SimplifiedMax, Plaintiff
2. L4ndaakk, Defendant

II. FACTS

1. On February 24, 2026, Plaintiff agreed to pay Defendant $10,000 in exchange for a gold drill. See P-001.
2. During their conversation, Plaintiff sent Defendant the promised $10,000 payment. See P-002.
3. Defendant then sent Plaintiff a package through the in-game parcel service, leading Plaintiff to believe he had sent the drill as promised. See P-003.
4. The parcel Defendant sent actually contained a single potato.
5. To date, Plaintiff has not received a gold drill from Defendant.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. The agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant to exchange $10,000 for a gold drill constitutes a contract. See Contracts Act §4.
2. Plaintiff upheld their obligation by paying the $10,000. Defendant failed to uphold their obligation by delivering a potato instead of a gold drill. Therefore, Defendant breached the contract. See Contracts Act §7.
3. Plaintiff suffered direct financial losses because Defendant failed to deliver the product as promised, even after Plaintiff sent the $10,000 payment. Plaintiff did not receive the item they agreed to purchase for that price.
4. Because the contract involved the sale of a good, Defendant committed the specific civil violation of Failure to Deliver Goods. See Redmont Civil Code Act, Part VI, §4.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Pursuant to Redmont Civil Code Act, Part VI, §4, Plaintiff is seeking the following relief from Defendant:

1. Monetary damages of $20,000 (200 Civil Penalty Units).
2. A specific performance order to uphold their obligation and deliver the gold drill. If Defendant does not have a gold drill, Plaintiff seeks a written apology from Defendant instead.

V. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001

View attachment 76394
View attachment 76395
View attachment 76396

Spoiler: P-002

View attachment 76397

Spoiler: P-003

View attachment 76398

VI. OATH
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 6th day of March 2026

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT

I. REQUESTED CHANGES
To amend §II(4) of the Plaintiff's Case Filing (#1) to read the following:

4. The parcel sent by the Plaintiff did not contain a golden drill.

II. REASONING
Plaintiff's Counsel attempted to verify the contents of the package sent to the Plaintiff. Based on the ticket, the contents of the package appear to be impossible to verify. It cannot be proven that it was or was not a potato. (See P-009.)

Furthermore, the only material question in this case regarding the contents of the package is whether or not the contents were a golden drill. The delivery of a package containing any item other than the item Plaintiff agreed to purchase for $10,000 constitutes Breach of Contract and Failure to Deliver Goods, regardless of what that other item is. It can be proven on the balance of the probabilities that the Plaintiff did not take possession of a golden drill after paying $10,000 to the Defendant.

Plaintiff's Counsel submitted the set of Facts including the specific contents of the package sent to the Plaintiff in good faith based on the Plaintiff's own account of the events.

III. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-009

Transcript of a staff ticket seeking to verify the contents of the parcel sent to the Plaintiff. The second screenshot sent by Plaintiff's Counsel in the ticket is P-003.

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WITNESS LIST

The Plaintiff respectfully petitions the Court to summon the following players as witnesses for the Plaintiff in this case:

1. SimplifiedMax

 

[Franciscus]

Motion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT

I. REQUESTED CHANGES
To amend §II(4) of the Plaintiff's Case Filing (#1) to read the following:


II. REASONING
Plaintiff's Counsel attempted to verify the contents of the package sent to the Plaintiff. Based on the ticket, the contents of the package appear to be impossible to verify. It cannot be proven that it was or was not a potato. (See P-009.)

Furthermore, the only material question in this case regarding the contents of the package is whether or not the contents were a golden drill. The delivery of a package containing any item other than the item Plaintiff agreed to purchase for $10,000 constitutes Breach of Contract and Failure to Deliver Goods, regardless of what that other item is. It can be proven on the balance of the probabilities that the Plaintiff did not take possession of a golden drill after paying $10,000 to the Defendant.

Plaintiff's Counsel submitted the set of Facts including the specific contents of the package sent to the Plaintiff in good faith based on the Plaintiff's own account of the events.

III. EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-009

View attachment 78420

Transcript of a staff ticket seeking to verify the contents of the parcel sent to the Plaintiff. The second screenshot sent by Plaintiff's Counsel in the ticket is P-003.

Consistent with Rule 3.3, granted. Feel free to strike the old text and insert the new text.

In line with rule 3.7, and noting that discovery will close in less than 72 hours, the Defendant ( @gribble19 ) shall have 72 hours after the close of discovery to file their amended answer.

 

[Franciscus]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WITNESS LIST

The Plaintiff respectfully petitions the Court to summon the following players as witnesses for the Plaintiff in this case:

1. SimplifiedMax

Noted.

 

[gribble19]

Your Honor, Defendant respectfully requests a further 24 hour extension of Discovery. The Discovery submissions made by Plaintiff have prompted Defendant to wish to make further submissions of their own, for which they require more time.