- Thread Author
- #1
Case Filing
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
TrueDarklander, The Worker's Party of Redmont
Plaintiff
v.
The Town of Oakridge, Smami
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
I. PARTIES
1. TrueDarklander
2. The Worker's Party of Redmont
3. Smami
4. The Department of Commerce and Transportation
II. FACTS
1. Smami was formerly in possession of the headquarters of the Worker's Party of Redmont
2. Smami was about to be evicted, before she transferred the properties to TrueDarklander on the 6th
3. On the 10th, TrueDarklander was evicted from the property
4. Following the eviction, TrueDarklander, acting on behalf of the Worker's Party of Redmont, repurchased the properties from the person who bought the property in the eviction auction for 200,000, despite the property being worth far less
5. TrueDarklander was given no information by either Smami, or the Town of Oakridge regarding the standing eviction order, nor given any advance notice
6. At the time of eviction, TrueDarklander met all playtime requirements to avoid eviction under normal circumstances
7. My client was not given an opportunity to buy back the property from the town before the property was auctioned off to another player.
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. By not giving proper notice before evicting TrueDarklander, the Town of Oakridge committed Wrongful Eviction as outlined in Section 7 Subsection 5 of the Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act
2. By not informing my client that they were about to be evicted, Smami failed to disclose, as outlined in Section 7, Subsection 2 of the Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act
3. By wrongfully taking the property from my client when he had no reason to doubt his ownership over the property, the Town of Oakridge committed conversion, as outlined in Section 7, Subsection 7 of the Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act
4. The property in question is the Headquarters of the Worker's Party of Redmont, and party money was used with consent to buyback the property. By reducing the amount of funds available to the WPR, the WPR had a reduced capability for advertising, campaigning, and party programs during an election cycle, constituting Loss of Enjoyment for my client and the WPR as a whole as outlined in Section 3, Subsection 5 of the Act of Congress - Redmont Civil Code Act
5. According to Section 2, Subsection 6 of the Oakridge Building Regulations, eviction is solely determined by the plot who holds the property in-game (in this case my client). Regulation - Oakridge Building Regulations
6. According to Section 2, Subsection 6 of the Oakridge Building Regulations, a player can be evicted from the property they hold if they have less than 6 hours of playtime in the last 30 days, and my client had well over 6 hours of playtime in the last 30 days at the time of the eviction, thus constituting a violation of this regulation. Regulation - Oakridge Building Regulations
7. According to Section 4, Subsection 2 of the Oakridge Building Regulations, my client was well within his rights to qualify for his right to redemption, and yet was not offered an opportunity to buy back the property from Oakridge, thus constituting a violation of this regulation. Regulation - Oakridge Building Regulations
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $200,000 as restitution for the money my client was forced to spend to buy back the wrongfully taken property
2. $100,000 for stress, confusion, and general loss of enjoyment for my client and the general Worker's Party of Redmont
3. Payment of all legal damages
Transfer of Property from Smami to my client:
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 eighth day of September, 2026