Lawsuit: Dismissed Singeheart, Addams & Associates V hadethegod, Wallavan Donovan and HL-Bank [2026] FCR 48

[Aelia_SingeH3art]

CASE FILING

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
Singeheart, Addams and Associates
Plaintiff
v.
Wallavan Donovan and Hadethegod
Defendants
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendants as follows:
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES

1. Plaintiff is Singeheart, Addams and Associates, a law firm operating within Redmont and represented in this matter by Aelia Singeheart.
2. Defendant Wallavan Donovan is an individual who held access to company funds and financial resources belonging to the Plaintiff.
3. Defendant Hadethegod is an individual who received funds originating from the Plaintiff and is alleged to have knowingly participated in the actions described herein.

II. FACTS

1. On July 1, at approximately 4:25 AM EST, Defendant Wallavan Donovan transferred and removed fifty-five thousand ($55,000) Redmont dollars belonging to Singeheart, Addams and Associates without authorization.
2. The transferred funds were sent to Defendant Hadethegod's business, HL-BANK.
3. Prior to the transfer, Defendant Wallavan Donovan expressed dissatisfaction regarding their salary
4. Plaintiff alleges that the unauthorized transfer was conducted in retaliation for the firm's refusal to grant Defendant Wallavan Donovan future equity in the company as they were not a founding member.
5. Plaintiff further alleges that both Defendants made misogynistic remarks and comments regarding the firm's status as a woman-led organization.
6. Following receipt of the funds, Defendant Hadethegod retained control of the funds and did not return them to the Plaintiff.
7. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Hadethegod subsequently used funds originating from the Plaintiff to place bounties against Aelia Singeheart and engage in continued harassment.
8. As a direct result of the Defendants' actions, the Plaintiff suffered financial losses, disruption to business operations, reputational harm, and continued harassment.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Wallavan Donovan committed Market Manipulation in violation of Redmont law.
2. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Wallavan Donovan committed Fraud by intentionally misrepresenting or abusing his position and access for personal gain.
3. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Wallavan Donovan committed Embezzlement by misappropriating company funds entrusted to him.
4. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Wallavan Donovan and Defendant Hadethegod committed Aggravated Theft through the unauthorized taking and retention of Plaintiff's property.
5. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Hadethegod acted as an Accomplice to the above criminal conduct by knowingly receiving and retaining the proceeds.
6. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Hadethegod engaged in Conspiracy to Commit a Crime through coordination with Defendant Wallavan Donovan.
7. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Hadethegod concealed Criminal Proceeds by maintaining possession and control of funds known to have been unlawfully obtained.
8. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Wallavan Donovan utilized False Credentials in connection with the conduct described above, in violation of Redmont law.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendants:

1. Full restitution of all fifty-five thousand ($55,000) Redmont dollars unlawfully removed from Singeheart, Addams and Associates.
2. Joint and several liability against the Defendants for all damages arising from their actions.
3. An award of interest equal to eight percent (8%) per month on all unrecovered funds beginning from the date of the unlawful transfer until full repayment is made.
4. Any statutory fines, penalties, incarceration, or other criminal sanctions authorized under Redmont law.
5. Reimbursement of all court costs, filing fees, and associated legal expenses.
6. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

WITNESSES

1. Aelia Singeheart (Aelia_Singeh3art)
2. Morticia Addams (morticiaaa)
3. Unalign (unalign)

EVIDENCE

1. Financial transaction logs showing the transfer of company funds.
2. Screenshots of communications between the parties.
3. Evidence of bounties placed against Aelia Singeheart.
4. Any messages or statements demonstrating retaliatory motive, misogynistic conduct, or conspiracy between the Defendants.

We would also like to formally request an in-game trial.

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 1st day of June 2026.

 

[Aelia_SingeH3art]

Motion

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION FOR EMERGENCY INJUNCTION

The plaintiff requests that all of Hadethegod, HL-Bank and Wallavan Donovan’s assets be frozen for the remainder of this case and that the Department of commerce does not liquidate them for the remainder of this case, doing so could harm the Plaintiffs reputation and can be used for continued Harassment.

 

[ko531]

Court Order

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE — ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

The Federal Court, upon reviewing this filing, sees that this appears to be a minor civil case with damages of under $120,000 sough, $55,000 to be exact. Such cases would be in the original jurisdiction of the District Court (see: Const. 16(1)(e)).

The Federal Court is thus contemplating whether or not to remand this case to the District Court. We wish to seek further information from Plaintiff in order to further develop the record of this case before issuing the contemplated remand. To do this, we issue this Order to Show Cause (see: RoFC, Section 10).

Within 48 hours, Plaintiff shall brief the Court in response to the following question(s):

1. What Court has original jurisdiction over this case?
2. Why does the Court identified in the answer to the first question have original jurisdiction over this case?

Failure to respond to the Order to Show Cause within 48 hours of the time of this post shall result in a Contempt of Court charge.

So adjudicated
Judge Ko

 

[Aelia_SingeH3art]

Brief

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
AMICUS BRIEF

PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Singeheart, Addams and Associates, and respectfully responds to the Court's Order to Show Cause as follows:

I. WHAT COURT HAS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER THIS CASE?

The Plaintiff submits that the Federal Court possesses original jurisdiction over this matter.

II. WHY DOES THE FEDERAL COURT HAVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OVER THIS CASE?

While the monetary damages sought by the Plaintiff are approximately $55,000, this action is not merely a minor civil dispute concerning financial compensation.

The Complaint alleges multiple serious violations of Redmont law, including Fraud, Embezzlement, Market Manipulation, Aggravated Theft, Conspiracy to Commit a Crime, Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, Accomplice Liability, and False Credentials.

When the alleged offenses and their associated penalties are considered collectively, the potential criminal exposure of the Defendants substantially exceeds the jurisdictional limits ordinarily associated with the District Court. Based upon the charges alleged in the Complaint, the cumulative punishment may reach approximately 510 penalty points and 110 minutes of incarceration.

Accordingly, this matter concerns conduct carrying penalties beyond those typically adjudicated within the District Court's jurisdiction. The Plaintiff therefore filed this action in Federal Court because the nature and severity of the alleged offenses, rather than solely the monetary damages requested, place the matter within the Federal Court's original jurisdiction.


Respectfully submitted,

Aelia Singeheart

For Singeheart, Addams and Associates

DATED: This 2nd day of June 2026.

 

[ko531]

Court Order

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Sua Sponte Dismissal

The defendant in their response to the court's order to show cause, which they mistakenly called an amicus brief, has admitted that they are seeking the equivilant of a criminal prosecution in a civil case. This by every measure is impossible. Citizens cannot prosecute other citizens.

The Executive Standards Act section 8(1)(b) gives the power to "prosecute on behalf of the federal government" exclusively to the Department of Justice. No other department or individual in redmont is given the power of prosecution.

Precedent tells an identical story. Justice JoeGamer states in Matthew100x v. xEndeavour [2022] SCR 21 "Citizens cannot file criminal charges against another person which is what this case does. It is possible to claim damages based off of criminal charges." This case does the exact same sin as the case cited. Justice JoeGamer goes on to add "In order for charges to be filed against someone, it has to be done through the Department of Legal Affairs since they are the only Government authorized department with the ability to file charges on behalf of the State."
It shall be noted that the Department of Legal Affairs was renamed to the Department of Justice.

The court did see issue with the way the case was filed as it does appear to be a proseuction but gave the plaintiff the benefit of the doubt and thought they just might be seeking civil damages on criminal actions as allowed by Part I section 4(3) of the Redmont Civil Code Act. As the defendant has now admitted to seeking possible criminal penalties such as fines and jail time, this case must be dismissed.

The court suggest that this either be reported to the DOJ as they have prosecutorial authority and/or rewrite and refile this case in the district court if plaintiff still wishes to seek civil damages.