Lawsuit: Dismissed Starwarsfan98951 v. Rylint [2021] DCR 75

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chantiu

Citizen
Chantiu
Chantiu
Joined
Oct 2, 2021
Messages
9
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

CIVIL ACTION


Starwarsfan98951
Plaintiff

v.

Rylint
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF


I. PARTIES
1. Starwarsfan98951
2. Rylint

II. FACTS
1. The plaintiff, Starwarsfan98951, was commissioned to do a contract for the defendant, Rylints company.
2. The defendant pressured the plaintiff to buy materials that consisted of netherrack and coal blocks from Vulgarfate.
3. The defendant fired the plaintiff after they used their hard-earned money for the materials for the job.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The defendant knowingly planned and took money from my client with the knowledge that they would not give it back.
2. The defendant left my client with copious amounts of materials with no intentions of using it or reimbursement to my client.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. The $400 for the building materials for the job.
2. An additional $600 for emotional distress and hardship.

unknown.png
unknown-1.png
unknown-2.png
unknown-3.png
unknown-4.png

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

10 December 2021
 
PwFVDhr.png


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

The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of the starwarsfan98951 v. Rylint. 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.​
 
Hi! I am RalphBohnerMWV. I am starwarsfan98951 on discord. I am here as the plantiff. I am being represented by the Lovely Law Firm. Thank you all for the time that you will be giving us for this case.
 
Your honour. I will be representing PerfectRylint in this case. I would like to ask for a 24hour extension due to the complexity of being sued 3x times for a relating issue. As well as different presiding judge or magistrate seeing as there might be a potential conflict as you are currently suing the defendant for a potentially related issue.
 
I will be recusing myself from this case, and handing it over to another Judge, to eliminate any potential bias.
 
I will be taking over this case, and I will grant the extension. Please have your response posted within 24 hours of this time, or we will move on without it.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

Starwarsfan9891
Plaintiff

v.

Rylint (Milkcrack representing)
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:
1. Starwasfan98951 was not commissioned to do a contract and there is no evidence of that. The defendant simply asked, the plaintiff to collect nether bricks which is the appropriate and officially Minecraft name for the block called nether bricks, unlike nether brick which is the official Minecraft name for the item nether brick. There was no set amount of money Starwarsfan98951 would get for gathering those nether bricks so there couldn't have been a legally binding contract.
2. As presented by the plaintiff the defendant offered to make an in-game sell chest where the plaintiff could sell his nether bricks so any implied deal the plaintiff may have perceived has been fulfilled already.
3. Also presented by the plaintiff is that Rylint did not ask for the plaintiff to buy resources from Panda-Co and that purchasing coal was unnecessary. Therefore Rylint can't be liable for the resources the plaintiff bought from Panda-Co
4. 600$ for emotional distress and hardship is unfounded and frivolous.
5. The plaintiff claims in the claim for relief that:
"1. The defendant knowingly planned and took money from my client with the knowledge that they would not give it back."
However, the plaintiff never gave took any money from the plaintiff relating to this issue and this was never alleged in the facts section.

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: 13th day of December 2021
 
Does the Plaintiff have a rebuttal?
 
REBUTTAL

Your honor, I believe that the motion to dismiss is merely unfounded.

1. The defendant did in fact commission my client to retrieve nether brick for them. Vulgarfate even quoted my client a price for the nether brick thus disproving your claim. Why else would they retrieve supplies for the defendant other than to use it for their business? Additionally, the defendant and their business partner did not refute my client's claim of malpractice. They even invited them back to work for the company, thus refuting your claim that my client was not involved with the defendant's company.

2. The defendant offered to make the chest for the nether brick that they asked my client to make. The deal was not completed at the time of this event. My client should have seen compensation for their services.

3. The defendant did not do their due diligence to which my client was never given proper access to the building nor were they given any tours of the building. Therefore my client had to retrieve supplies from PandaCo. This is negligence on the defense's side.

4. A payment of $600 is indeed warranted and relevant to this case. My client has experienced emotional and mental manipulation at the hands of the defendant. My client was used for their labor and resources and then they were merely discarded after the defendant got what they wanted from my client.

5. The defendant did take money indirectly from my client. They coaxed my client into using their own personal funds to gather materials and supplies for them. My client should be reimbursed for the $400 in materials that the defendant asked them to retrieve. My client went to Vulgarfate for the materials which totaled the amount listed above.

Below is the evidence suggesting my client was in fact hired by the defendant's company and was even acknowledged as an employee until they displayed their dissatisfaction in their treatment.
unknown-5.png


The price quote from Vulgarfate for the nether brick and coal to which the defense stated there was "no price".

unknown-7.png


unknown-6.png
 

Verdict


I am going to accept the motion to dismiss, and it is the opinion of the Court that there is no basis for a lawsuit here. This opinion is formed on the following grounds:

The definition of a contract, as provided by the Foundation of Contract Law, is “a legally binding agreement that is one over which you can sue or be sued to enforce.”

Also pursuant to the Foundation of Contract Law act is the existence of a misrepresentation in a contract. A misrepresentation is defined as “when one party to the agreement makes a statement of fact which is untrue and the other party relies on it and incurs a loss.” There are, however, subcategories of misrepresentations which can lessen the liability of one party or another.

In this case, the Defendant offered the contract to the Plaintiff, and specified one item to be sold. The Plaintiff and the Defendant then had a disagreement about the item as defined by the contract, leading this section to be a misrepresentation. However, the type of misrepresentation is an innocent one, meaning that it was not the intention of the Defendant to mislead the Plaintiff.

Because the Defendant used the technical and legally correct term for the item, and the misinterpretation was made on the Plaintiff’s side, the Defendant cannot be held liable for the Plaintiff’s actions while operating under this misconception.

Furthermore, the Defendant provided for everything included in the contract, and never forced the Plaintiff to do anything that would incur a loss for the Plaintiff, and as such is absolved of liability for the Plaintiff’s costs.

This case is hereby dismissed. The Court thanks both parties for their time.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top