Lawsuit: Dismissed The_Superior10 v. Lukeyyy11 [2024] FCR 11

[Snowy_Heart]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


The_Superior10
Plaintiff (Lovely Law Representing)

v.

lukeyyy11
(Defendant)

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
The_Superior10 bid on a mystery box at an auction hosted by lukeyyy11 and won with a bid of 3500 dollars. After the bid The_Superior10 was going to pay lukeyyy11 3500 dollars however 35,000 dollars was taken from his account instead and transferred to lukeyyy11. After realizing this mistake and requesting the money back lukeyyy11 refused. Even after knowing that the incorrect amount was given in error lukeyyy11 refused to give back the money that rightfully belonged to my client. In receiving the errored 35000 lukeyyy11 failed to uphold the original agreement which was to exchange the mystery box for 3500.


I. PARTIES
1. The_Superior10
2. lukeyyy11

II. FACTS
1. The_superior10 bid $3500 on Lukeyyy11’s mystery box and won.
2. When receiving the mystery box $35,000 was sent by mistake.
3. Lukeyyy11 was notified of the mistake.
4.Lukeyyy11 denied the mistake took place
4. After admitting the mistake took place Lukeyyy11 refused to pay back the mistaken funds.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. According to the contract act in order for a contract to be valid there needs to be an offer, acceptance, and consideration. An official bid includes all these and, in the past, has been set as president as a contract. The offer of this contract would be the mystery box in exchange for $3500. By accepting $35000 and refusing to give it back the defense fails to uphold their offer for the bid since $35,000 is not $3500.
2.by refusing to return the money the plaintiff is missing out on opportunity cost from investments he could have made with the $35,000. At the very least my client could have held the money inside bobs bank which would have given him 7 percent interest.
3.by refusing to return money that was clearly not intended for him the defense acted outrageously and put the plaintiff in a position of detrimental fiscal risk.
4. Not having the $35000 dollars to spend the plaintiff couldn't purchase the things that they wanted, lead to loss of enjoyment of Redmont.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $31,500 be returned as consequential damages to replace the money unrightfully taken.
2. $3450 of consequential damages for opportunity costs. This equates to the 7 percent the plaintiff would have secured by having it in bobs bank and $1000 for the loss of opportunities that he could have used the money for.
3.$5000 of punitive damages
4.$5000 for loss of enjoyment of Redmont
5. $8890 for legal fees.


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 10th day of January 2024

 

[RelaxedGV]

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

@lukeyyy11 is required to appear before the court in the case of the The_Superior10 v. lukeyyy11. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favour 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.​

 

[lukeyyy]

Ok then, I am crying in real life right now. This has completely ruined my birthday. I am in shock and broken at this court case. This is harassment and I will not stand for such rudeness by this government and The_superior. I hereby counter sue for Phycological Torment by TheSuperuor. This will not stand

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Ok then, I am crying in real life right now. This has completely ruined my birthday. I am in shock and broken at this court case. This is harassment and I will not stand for such rudeness by this government and The_superior. I hereby counter sue for Phycological Torment by TheSuperuor. This will not stand

Ok then, I am crying in real life right now. This has completely ruined my birthday. I am in shock and broken at this court case. This is harassment and I will not stand for such rudeness by this government and The_superior. I hereby counter sue for Phycological Torment by TheSuperuor. This will not stand

Objection
breach of procedure
Your honor this comment does not follow the proper guidelines outline in the court guide on how to respond to a complaint

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO STRIKE

Your Honor, its clear that the above statements from the defendent are an emotional outburst with no legal nor argumentative value to the court. I request that the court strike his above outburst.

I also strongly recommend the defendent to find legal counsol, or request a public defender.

Thank you.
Your Honor.

​

 

[RelaxedGV]

Defense has 24 hours to respond to the Motion and Objection.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

RESPONSE TO OBJECTION
Your Honor, we extend our apologies for our client's emotional outburst during the proceedings. He was undergoing a challenging moment related to the case. We hereby consent to having his statement struck from the record.

We will be responding to the complaint shortly.

Thank you. Your Honor​

 

[RelaxedGV]

Alright, the Motion to Strike and Objection will both be granted

 

[Unseatedduke1]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT​

Plaintiff:
The_Superior10

v.

Defendant:
Lukeyyy11 (Represented by Dragon Law Firm)

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

1. The defense affirms the claim that The_Superior10 bid on a mystery box at an auction hosted by lukeyyy11 and won.
2. The defense affirms that the plaintiff received the mystery box and the plaintiff sent 35,000 to the defendant.
3. The defense denies that it was a mistake, The defense affairs that lukeyyy11 refused to to pay back the requested money.
4. The defense affirms that even after being informed that an extra amount was given in error, lukeyyy11 refused to return the money as he had no obligation to.
5. The defense denies that lukeyyy11 broke the original agreement.

II. DEFENSES

1. The_Superior10 did bid on a mystery box at a discord auction hosted by my client. After informing The_Superior10 that he “won” by saying “you win,” my client and The_Superior10 made the transfer in-game.

2. 35,000 was not taken from the plaintiffs account; it was transferred with consent from The_Superior10. When using the /pay command, the plaintiff is consenting to sending the amount specified to the user specified.

3. My client assumed the extra funds were a token of appreciation or called a gift. My client was going to use the funds transferred as economic gain, not taking advantage of the gift but rather using the gift. My client offered to give the plaintiff 10,000 of the amount back as a good gesture; my client refused to give back the entire gift because there is no obligation to return money that is willingly given. The amount over 3,500 should be treated as a gift.

4. After being informed that the gift was sent in error, my client refused to give the entire amount back because my client intended to use the gift to further his financial goals. My client had no obligation to 1. Send the gift back after it was willingly sent. 2. If The_Superior10 sent it in error or by mistake, my client has no obligation to send the money back as it wasn’t my clients fault for not reviewing the /pay command.

5. Your honor, there was no original legally binding agreement; the plaintiff mentions the “contract act,” which was vetoed and never signed into law. Furthermore, your honor, if you look at the “The Foundation of Contract Law (CLF)” that was signed into law, you can see the following:

The Foundation of Contract Law (CLF) Section 4.
4 - What is a contract
(1) A contract is a legally binding agreement that is one over which you can sue or be sued to enforce.
(2) Contracts with non-legally binding agreements are known as promises/gifts.
(3) If an agreement is to be a contract, there must be certain essential criteria that must exist to create a contract.
(4) These are in order: Offer, Acceptance, Consideration, Capacity, Legality, Legal intent, and Format.
(5) If any one of these criteria is absent from the arrangement, it will not suffice and a contract, meaning it will not legally bind the two people together.

The discord conversation clearly does not constitute a legally binding contract with the appropriate format. Moreover, it is evident that my client had no legal intent in the conversation beyond the act of providing the mystery box to the plaintiff, which my client duly fulfilled.

The plaintiffs legal representative referenced a statute that is not currently part of the legal framework of Redmont. Additionally, despite alluding to past precedent, the plaintiff neglected to provide citations for such historical legal decisions.

Your Honor, the legal representative for the plaintiff not only misspelled key terms but also cited inaccurate materials in relation to this case. Not only that, but the counsel repeatedly characterizes this incident as a "mistake." However, a mistake on the plaintiff's part does not justify any punishment or repayment from the defendant's side. Concluding our response, even if this were considered a contract (Which it fails to meet the criteria to be), our client did not breach any agreement. Our client received the specified amount, plus an additional sum, which originated from the plaintiff's end. Subsequently, our client fulfilled the transaction by delivering the mystery box to the plaintiff.

This entire suit is based on a non-legally binding promise of two individuals; last I checked, promises are not backed by law.

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 19th day of January 2024

 

[RelaxedGV]

Thank you, we will now move onto Discovery, this will last 7 days unless both sides agree to end it earlier.

Please provide any evidence and a list of Witnesses within this time frame.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your Honor,
The plaintiff would like to call The_superior10 as a witness.
The plaintiff would like to call Lukeyyy11 as a witness.
Thank you.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
INTERROGATORY

The_Superior10
Plaintiff (Lovely Law Representing)

v.

lukeyyy11
(Defendant)


QUESTIONS FOR THE DEFENSE
1. Is it true that taking money that you know is not yours would be considered stealing?
2. Is it true that the defendant knew the money was not theirs?



The plaintiff maintains the right to ask up to three more questions of the prosecution via interrogatory at a later date.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Your Honor,
The plaintiff would like to call The_superior10 as a witness.
The plaintiff would like to call Lukeyyy11 as a witness.
Thank you.

Your honor, the plaintiff cannot call the defendant to testify against themselves

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your honor, the plaintiff cannot call the defendant to testify against themselves

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure

Your Honor,
The statement above does not follow any of the rules of discovery and what is permitted during this phase of court nor is it a proper objection in proper objection format.​

 

[Alexander P. Love]

This is a breach of procedure objection, my apologies for omitting that originally as I’m on my phone. The Constitution establishes this right which supersedes any court policy.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
Answer to INTERROGATORY

The_Superior10
(Plaintiff)

v.

lukeyyy11
(Represented by Dragon Law)

1. No, it is not accurate to label the transaction as stealing. The defendant did not take the money unlawfully or without consent. The funds were transferred willingly by The_Superior10, and there was no intent to misappropriate them. The defendant believes the transaction was based on consent and not an act of stealing.

2. The defendant acknowledges receiving the funds but disputes the characterization that they 'knew' the money was not theirs. The transaction occurred using the /pay command, and the defendant assumed it was a legitimate transfer of funds. There was no indication during the transaction that the funds were sent in error. It was only after the fact, when the plaintiff claimed a mistake, that the defendant considered the possibility of an error.

Thank you.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Your Honor, I have revised our defense's objection to enhance clarity. Regarding the plaintiff's objection, we are confident that this revision adequately addresses the expressed concern.

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure

Your Honor, we assert that the objection is grounded in the fundamental right of our client under PART IV - RIGHTS & FREEDOMS V of the Redmont constitution. This right explicitly states that no citizen is compelled to produce self-incriminating evidence in a court of law, Congressional hearing, subpoena, or impeachment trial. Therefore, any attempt to require our client to testify against himself would contravene this constitutional safeguard and should be considered.
​

 

[RelaxedGV]

The Objection will be sustained given non proper formatting. The response to the Objection is also not arguing that the Objection should be rejected and rather arguing that the Plaintiff cannot call the Defendant in as a Witness.

On the Plaintiff calling the Defense to testify, this is allowed given should the Plaintiff ask a question that would force the Defense to provide self-incriminating evidence the Defense can always plead the fifth right.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your Honor, I would like to submit photos the following into evidence,
exhibit A

Exhibit B

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your Honor, I would like to submit photos the following into evidence:
exhibit C

exhinit D

Exhibit E

Exhibit F

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Evidence and a list of Witnesses​

Your Honor,
The defense would like to call The_Superior10 as a witness.
The defense would like to call lukeyyy11 as a witness.

We would also like to enter the following screenshots into Evidence:

Spoiler: Exhibit A

Spoiler: Exhibit B

Spoiler: Exhibit C

Spoiler: Exhibit D

Spoiler: Exhibit E

Thank You

 

[Unseatedduke1]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
INTERROGATORY​

The_Superior10
(Plaintiff)

v.

lukeyyy11
(Represented by Dragon Law)


QUESTIONS FOR THE PLAINTIFF
1. Yes or No? Does the plaintiff, acknowledge or believe that they made a mistake when entering the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant?



The defense maintains the right to ask up to four more questions via interrogatory up to 72 hours prior to the end of discovery.

Thank You.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
INTERROGATORY​

The_Superior10
(Plaintiff)

v.

lukeyyy11
(Represented by Dragon Law)


QUESTIONS FOR THE PLAINTIFF
1. Yes or No? Does the plaintiff, acknowledge or believe that they made a mistake when entering the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant?



The defense maintains the right to ask up to four more questions via interrogatory up to 72 hours prior to the end of discovery.

Thank You.

I prefer yes, but No does work on occassion.

The money was never supposed to go to the defendent. The agreed upon amount was $3500 not $35,000. $35,000 was sent in error.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
INTERROGATORY​

The_Superior10
(Plaintiff)

v.

lukeyyy11
(Represented by Dragon Law)


QUESTIONS FOR THE PLAINTIFF
1. Yes or No? Does the plaintiff, acknowledge or believe that they made a mistake when entering the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant?



The defense maintains the right to ask up to four more questions via interrogatory up to 72 hours prior to the end of discovery.

Thank You.

Objection
Breach of procedure

Your Honor, the defense counsel claims to have 4 more questions however they have already asked 2 questions both of which I answered.

According to the court procedures guide rule 4.8 of discover "The Plaintiff and Defendant may ask up to 5 relevant questions while within discovery" of which 2 have been asked.

 

[RelaxedGV]

Objection
Breach of procedure

Your Honor, the defense counsel claims to have 4 more questions however they have already asked 2 questions both of which I answered.

According to the court procedures guide rule 4.8 of discover "The Plaintiff and Defendant may ask up to 5 relevant questions while within discovery" of which 2 have been asked.

Objection overruled so long as no extra questions have been answered there is no need to strike them. It can just be a simple typo. While the Defense should be more careful, its not a Breach of Procedure.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

I prefer yes, but No does work on occassion.

The money was never supposed to go to the defendent. The agreed upon amount was $3500 not $35,000. $35,000 was sent in error.

Objection
Non-responsive​

Your Honor, the plaintiff misconstrued the "Yes or No?" inquiry, treating it as a standalone question when it was explicitly directed at the following statement. Furthermore, the plaintiff neglected to address the actual question, which inquired whether they acknowledge or believe they made a mistake when inputting the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant. The plaintiff failed to clearly respond to this specific inquiry. We respectfully request that Your Honor instruct the plaintiff to provide a clear and direct answer to the singular question posed.

Thank you.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Objection
Non-responsive​

Your Honor, the plaintiff misconstrued the "Yes or No?" inquiry, treating it as a standalone question when it was explicitly directed at the following statement. Furthermore, the plaintiff neglected to address the actual question, which inquired whether they acknowledge or believe they made a mistake when inputting the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant. The plaintiff failed to clearly respond to this specific inquiry. We respectfully request that Your Honor instruct the plaintiff to provide a clear and direct answer to the singular question posed.

Thank you.

Your Honor,

the objection guide disctates that the non-responsive objection pertains to: "the witness's response constitutes an answer to a question other than the one that was asked, or no answer at all."

The precident set in the commonwealth of redmont v. V__D fcr 109 2023 states that "The Objection will be overruled given the Defendant's attorney is not a Witness within this case. Nothing Pending according to the Objections Guide may only be used on a Witness. AlexanderLove is not a Witness and is simply the Defendant's Attorney."

The same logic should be applied to the non-responsive objection. I am not The witness as the objection guide requires, just the plaintiffs attorney.

Furthermore, I had answered the questions to the best of my ability and understanding.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Your Honor,

the objection guide disctates that the non-responsive objection pertains to: "the witness's response constitutes an answer to a question other than the one that was asked, or no answer at all."

The precident set in the commonwealth of redmont v. V__D fcr 109 2023 states that "The Objection will be overruled given the Defendant's attorney is not a Witness within this case. Nothing Pending according to the Objections Guide may only be used on a Witness. AlexanderLove is not a Witness and is simply the Defendant's Attorney."

The same logic should be applied to the non-responsive objection. I am not The witness as the objection guide requires, just the plaintiffs attorney.

Furthermore, I had answered the questions to the best of my ability and understanding.

Objection
Relevance​

Your Honor, the plaintiff's attorney is attempting to cite a precedent from a case that has not yet concluded. It's worth noting that the objection to this was also raised by the current attorney, who seems to be attempting to establish their own precedent. It's also crucial to clarify that the previous objection in that case the plaintiff is referring to was a "Nothing Pending" objection. In the context of the interrogatory, how do we ensure accountability for the counsel's failure to provide answers to questions clearly?

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Objection
Relevance​

Your Honor, the plaintiff's attorney is attempting to cite a precedent from a case that has not yet concluded. It's worth noting that the objection to this was also raised by the current attorney, who seems to be attempting to establish their own precedent. It's also crucial to clarify that the previous objection in that case the plaintiff is referring to was a "Nothing Pending" objection. In the context of the interrogatory, how do we ensure accountability for the counsel's failure to provide answers to questions clearly?

Your Honor,
1. I would like to point out to the court that this is an objection to a response to an objection which is generally against court procedure since only one objection is allowed per matter as it states in the objections guide. "Objections are on a per matter issue. One Objection and one Counter is allowed per matter. " This is also backed up by Dartanmans ruling on SCR 23 2023 where he states "Objecting to Responses is generally against court procedure, and failure to adhere to these rules may result in Contempt of Court."

2. the defense states that precedent is set at the conclusion of a trial however that is not true. There have been many instances of precedents having been set outside of a court room let alone inside of the court room in response to an objection. the judge's response to an objection is a "ruling" on that objection and should be used as precedent going forward.

3. The defense states that I am trying to establish my own precedent and that is simply not true. I never quoted myself in an attempt to set precedent, I quoted Honorable Judge RelaxedGV who is the one who set the precedent inside of the court on the objectable matter.

​

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your Honor,
I would like to submit this marketplace auction as evidence to the court.
Exhibit G

Discord - A New Way to Chat with Friends & Communities

Discord is the easiest way to communicate over voice, video, and text. Chat, hang out, and stay close with your friends and communities.

discord.com

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Evidence and a list of Witnesses​

Your Honor,
The defense would like to call The_Superior10 as a witness.
The defense would like to call lukeyyy11 as a witness.

We would also like to enter the following screenshots into Evidence:

Spoiler: Exhibit A

View attachment 40692

Spoiler: Exhibit B

View attachment 40693

Spoiler: Exhibit C

View attachment 40694

Spoiler: Exhibit D

View attachment 40695

Spoiler: Exhibit E

View attachment 40696

Thank You

Objection
Improper Evidence
Your Honor, the evidence above is taken out of context.

exhibit A is only a single screenshot of a single text with no context as to what came before or after it. Purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

Exhibit B is a single text with no context as what came before it or after it purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

exhibit C does not have enough context and is purposefully cropped to exclude what comes before it. and after it.

Exhibit D zlost is not an expert on this topic nor is his words admissible to the court. other than his opinion this evidence holds no relevance on the court.​

 

[RelaxedGV]

Objection
Relevance​

Your Honor, the plaintiff's attorney is attempting to cite a precedent from a case that has not yet concluded. It's worth noting that the objection to this was also raised by the current attorney, who seems to be attempting to establish their own precedent. It's also crucial to clarify that the previous objection in that case the plaintiff is referring to was a "Nothing Pending" objection. In the context of the interrogatory, how do we ensure accountability for the counsel's failure to provide answers to questions clearly?

This Objection is going to be ruled on first given its importance to the first. I will be overruling this Objection as given I not only preside over the case but that can still dictate how things should go along. I ruled on an Objection within that case similar to this that stated the reasoning given by the Plaintiff's Attorney.

Objection
Non-responsive​

Your Honor, the plaintiff misconstrued the "Yes or No?" inquiry, treating it as a standalone question when it was explicitly directed at the following statement. Furthermore, the plaintiff neglected to address the actual question, which inquired whether they acknowledge or believe they made a mistake when inputting the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant. The plaintiff failed to clearly respond to this specific inquiry. We respectfully request that Your Honor instruct the plaintiff to provide a clear and direct answer to the singular question posed.

Thank you.

This Objection will also be overruled given Non-responsive pertains strictly to Witnesses and not Attorneys. While I do understand that there is an importance to being able to object to responses the opposing party gives you can do so via other means.

 

[RelaxedGV]

Objection
Improper Evidence
Your Honor, the evidence above is taken out of context.

exhibit A is only a single screenshot of a single text with no context as to what came before or after it. Purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

Exhibit B is a single text with no context as what came before it or after it purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

exhibit C does not have enough context and is purposefully cropped to exclude what comes before it. and after it.

Exhibit D zlost is not an expert on this topic nor is his words admissible to the court. other than his opinion this evidence holds no relevance on the court.​

Defense has 24 hours to respond to this Objection.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

Objection
Improper Evidence
Your Honor, the evidence above is taken out of context.

exhibit A is only a single screenshot of a single text with no context as to what came before or after it. Purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

Exhibit B is a single text with no context as what came before it or after it purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

exhibit C does not have enough context and is purposefully cropped to exclude what comes before it. and after it.

Exhibit D zlost is not an expert on this topic nor is his words admissible to the court. other than his opinion this evidence holds no relevance on the court.​

Your Honor ,

In response to Exhibit A, I am providing the full screenshot below, which doesn't add anything else to the conversation:

Spoiler: Exhibit A

In response to Exhibit B, that screenshot is the entire statement. The conversation before and after has no relevance, but to please the court, I have reattached it:

Spoiler: Exhibit B

In response to Exhibit C, we have provided a full screenshot below to fix this objection:

Spoiler: Exhibit C

In response to Exhibit D, we are willing to remove that Exhibit of evidence:

Your Honor I apologize for the confusion. We were trying to avoid wasting the court's time on irrelevant conversations.

Thank You.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

I prefer yes, but No does work on occassion.

The money was never supposed to go to the defendent. The agreed upon amount was $3500 not $35,000. $35,000 was sent in error.

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO COMPEL​

The defense requests that the plaintiff's legal team provide a proper response to the following question:

1. The plaintiff's legal team treated the "Yes or No?" as a standalone question when it was evidently part of a larger inquiry.
2. The plaintiff's legal team neglected to address the query "Does the plaintiff acknowledge or believe that they made a mistake when entering the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant?" The plaintiff's team replied, "The money was never supposed to go to the defendant. The agreed-upon amount was $3500, not $35,000. $35,000 was sent in error." This response does not directly answer the question, which specifically inquires whether the PLAINTIFF acknowledges or believes that THEY made a mistake when ENTERING the amount into the /pay command.

Your Honor, we kindly request that the plaintiff's counsel provides a more accurate response to this question.

DATED: This 24th day of January 2024.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

exhibit A

Objection, Your Honor
Relevance. This screenshot does nothing to prove anything materially in this case. The money in question is 31.5k, not 32k so there is no proof that this is linked to this case. Furthermore, it simply only shows statements of our client which are not to be construed as proper legal opinions nor admissions of any civil wrongdoing.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to plaintiff Exhibit B on the grounds of relevance. This screenshot does nothing to prove anything materially in this case. It simply only shows statements of our client which are not to be construed as proper legal opinions nor admissions of any civil wrongdoing.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to plaintiff Exhibit C on the grounds of relevance. It simply shows a command that is improperly formatted and should have been rejected by the server anyways. Commas and letters are not accepted in the pay command.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to plaintiff Exhibit C on the grounds of improper evidence. The exhibit is cropped and therefore modified. The plaintiff objected to cropped evidence earlier, so their cropped evidence should not be admitted either.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to plaintiff Exhibit B on the grounds of improper evidence. The exhibit is cropped and therefore modified. The plaintiff objected to cropped evidence earlier, so their cropped evidence should not be admitted either.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to plaintiff Exhibit A on the grounds of improper evidence. The exhibit is cropped and therefore modified. The plaintiff objected to cropped evidence earlier, so their cropped evidence should not be admitted either.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to Exhibits A and B on the grounds of speculation and incompetent as it shows our client making an assertion about an action despite having only layman familiarity with the law. He is not a legal expert and thus his opinions and analysis is not admissible in Court, and is speculative.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to Exhibit D on the grounds of relevance. The defendant offering to pay the plaintiff "10k" is not materially relevant to the core question of this case. Further, the screenshot says 10k, but we don't know what. It could be 10k blocks of air, and therefore cannot be proven to be affiliated with this case, which is about money. This precedent is established in contract law cases where units or a dollar sign must be specified with the number for the Court to construe that number as a dollar amount.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Objection, Your Honor
I object to Exhibit F on the grounds of relevance. It offers nothing new to the case. We already know the plaintiff paid out $35,000 from other evidence, so this evidence is needlessly cumulative. Furthermore, it doesn't specify the recipient, so the plaintiff cannot prove this was not a different instance of /pay USER 35000.

 

[RelaxedGV]

Before I rule on any of the Objections, I would like to state that all Objections and Motions are to be posted in one message. I will give a warning however should this happen again it will be a Contempt of Court (This primarily applies to AlexanderLove however both sides should understand this). With that said:

Objection
Improper Evidence
Your Honor, the evidence above is taken out of context.

exhibit A is only a single screenshot of a single text with no context as to what came before or after it. Purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

Exhibit B is a single text with no context as what came before it or after it purposefully manipulated that way through cropping.

exhibit C does not have enough context and is purposefully cropped to exclude what comes before it. and after it.

Exhibit D zlost is not an expert on this topic nor is his words admissible to the court. other than his opinion this evidence holds no relevance on the court.​

The Objection is overruled given not only is a single message usually posted as that is what is relevant to the Court however should context within the screenshot be important then either side can present to then invalidate the piece of evidence. This is how its been done in the past throughout numerous Court Cases.

As for every single Objection posted by AlexanderLove, they are all overruled given the evidence is either relevant, a simple rounding issue, the Defendant stated them, a simple assumption of both parties, or shows the act of the payment occurring. All of the Objections are chalked up and are rejected for those reasons.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO COMPEL​

The defense requests that the plaintiff's legal team provide a proper response to the following question:

1. The plaintiff's legal team treated the "Yes or No?" as a standalone question when it was evidently part of a larger inquiry.
2. The plaintiff's legal team neglected to address the query "Does the plaintiff acknowledge or believe that they made a mistake when entering the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant?" The plaintiff's team replied, "The money was never supposed to go to the defendant. The agreed-upon amount was $3500, not $35,000. $35,000 was sent in error." This response does not directly answer the question, which specifically inquires whether the PLAINTIFF acknowledges or believes that THEY made a mistake when ENTERING the amount into the /pay command.

Your Honor, we kindly request that the plaintiff's counsel provides a more accurate response to this question.

DATED: This 24th day of January 2024.

Your Honor, this motion is still not addressed.

 

[RelaxedGV]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO COMPEL​

The defense requests that the plaintiff's legal team provide a proper response to the following question:

1. The plaintiff's legal team treated the "Yes or No?" as a standalone question when it was evidently part of a larger inquiry.
2. The plaintiff's legal team neglected to address the query "Does the plaintiff acknowledge or believe that they made a mistake when entering the amount into the /pay command during the transaction with the defendant?" The plaintiff's team replied, "The money was never supposed to go to the defendant. The agreed-upon amount was $3500, not $35,000. $35,000 was sent in error." This response does not directly answer the question, which specifically inquires whether the PLAINTIFF acknowledges or believes that THEY made a mistake when ENTERING the amount into the /pay command.

Your Honor, we kindly request that the plaintiff's counsel provides a more accurate response to this question.

DATED: This 24th day of January 2024.

Apologies for missing this, I must have missed it while ruling on all of the Objections. This Motion is Sustained as the question can simply be answered by a simple yes or no. The Plaintiff is to provide an either yes or no answer to the question from the Defense. The Plaintiff has 48 hours to do so.

Discovery is also now over and we will be moving onto Opening Statements. The Plaintiff has 72 hours to provide theirs.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Apologies for missing this, I must have missed it while ruling on all of the Objections. This Motion is Sustained as the question can simply be answered by a simple yes or no. The Plaintiff is to provide an either yes or no answer to the question from the Defense. The Plaintiff has 48 hours to do so.

Discovery is also now over and we will be moving onto Opening Statements. The Plaintiff has 72 hours to provide theirs.

No.

 

[Unseatedduke1]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS​

The defense moves for the dismissal of the complaint in this case and respectfully asserts the following:

1. Legal Errors: The foundation of the Plaintiff's case is seriously flawed due to a series of legal errors. The Plaintiff's lawyer, in the original complaint, mentioned laws that were never officially enacted. Additionally, a key precedent supporting the Plaintiff's claims was cited without providing the necessary documentation. These clear omissions and misrepresentations undermine the core of the Plaintiff's case, making it not only deficient but fundamentally flawed.
   
   
2. Contradiction: A crucial element of the Plaintiff's case revolves around the alleged mistaken transfer of $35,000, a central point of their grievance. However, a troubling contradiction arises when the Plaintiffs lawyer, in response to a direct question about the plaintiff acknowledging an error, categorically states, "No." This contradiction between the initial claim and subsequent denial reveals a significant lack of consistency, casting doubt on the credibility of the entire narrative.
   
   
3. Admission of Intent: The most revealing aspect is the Plaintiff's explicit denial of any error in the transaction. By stating unequivocally that no mistake was made during the fund transfer, the Plaintiff unintentionally admits to the intentional nature of the transaction. This admission not only challenges the foundation of the Plaintiff's case but also renders it inherently frivolous, as the alleged mistake is contradicted by the Plaintiff's own statement.

Based on the mentioned legal issues, the Defense respectfully urges this honorable court to utilize its judicial authority and promptly dismiss this case with prejudice under Rule 5.14.

DATED: This 30th day of January 2024

 

[RelaxedGV]

Plaintiff has 72 hours to respond to the Motion to Dimiss.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS​

The defense moves for the dismissal of the complaint in this case and respectfully asserts the following:

1. Legal Errors: The foundation of the Plaintiff's case is seriously flawed due to a series of legal errors. The Plaintiff's lawyer, in the original complaint, mentioned laws that were never officially enacted. Additionally, a key precedent supporting the Plaintiff's claims was cited without providing the necessary documentation. These clear omissions and misrepresentations undermine the core of the Plaintiff's case, making it not only deficient but fundamentally flawed.
   
   
2. Contradiction: A crucial element of the Plaintiff's case revolves around the alleged mistaken transfer of $35,000, a central point of their grievance. However, a troubling contradiction arises when the Plaintiffs lawyer, in response to a direct question about the plaintiff acknowledging an error, categorically states, "No." This contradiction between the initial claim and subsequent denial reveals a significant lack of consistency, casting doubt on the credibility of the entire narrative.
   
   
3. Admission of Intent: The most revealing aspect is the Plaintiff's explicit denial of any error in the transaction. By stating unequivocally that no mistake was made during the fund transfer, the Plaintiff unintentionally admits to the intentional nature of the transaction. This admission not only challenges the foundation of the Plaintiff's case but also renders it inherently frivolous, as the alleged mistake is contradicted by the Plaintiff's own statement.

Based on the mentioned legal issues, the Defense respectfully urges this honorable court to utilize its judicial authority and promptly dismiss this case with prejudice under Rule 5.14.

DATED: This 30th day of January 2024

OBJECTION
breach of procedure
Your Honor,
according to court procedure 5.2 "A Motion to Dismiss must be submitted at anytime prior to the beginning of opening statements." opening statements have already began and discovery has already ended therefor this motion to dismiss violates rule 5.2. further more rule 5.1 dictates that "A Motion to Dismiss must specify the Discovery Rule that a lawyer wishes to submit under. The used Rule must be applied using law, facts-in-case, evidence-in-case, or previous court decisions." the defence never specified under which discovery rule he is filing his motion to dismiss under.​