Lawsuit: Dismissed UntitledSteve vs. MAXXXMAXXX [2026] DCR 184

[Corvyx]

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


UntitledSteve
Plaintiff

v.

MAXXXMAXXX
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

On 30/09/2026, the Defendant stated in chat that the first person to kill him would receive $1,000. My client accepted and performed the condition stated by the Defendant.

After my client performed the condition, the Defendant refused to provide the promised $1,000 and claimed that he had intended the payment to be in Zimbabwean Dollars, which he stated would amount to approximately $0.01 in Redmont currency.

The original statement did not state that the promised $1,000 was Zimbabwean Dollars. The Defendant therefore failed to provide the compensation that was offered for completing the stated condition.

Screenshots of the relevant communications are attached as evidence.

I. PARTIES
1. UntitledSteve, represented by Corvyx. (Plaintiff)
2. MAXXXMAXXX. (Defendant)

II. FACTS
1. On 30/09/2026, the Defendant stated in chat that the first person to kill him would receive $1,000.
2. The Defendant's statement constituted an offer of payment in exchange for the completion of the stated condition.
3. The Plaintiff killed the Defendant, thereby performing the condition stated by the Defendant.
4. The Plaintiff has screenshots documenting the Defendant's original offer.
5. Following the completion of the condition, the Defendant refused to provide the promised $1,000.
6. The Defendant subsequently claimed that he intended the $1,000 to be Zimbabwean Dollars rather than Redmont currency.
7. The original statement, as documented in the attached screenshots, did not specify that the $1,000 would be paid in Zimbabwean Dollars.
8. The Defendant has therefore failed to perform the payment obligation allegedly created by his offer.
9. The Plaintiff reserves the right to present additional evidence establishing that the Plaintiff's client performed the condition, including witness testimony, server records, combat records, or other available evidence.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Defendant's conduct constitutes a breach of contract under Part VI, Section 1 of the Redmont Civil Code Act.
2. Part VI, Section 1 provides that a person commits a breach of contract where they fail to perform obligations under a valid and enforceable contract without lawful excuse.
3. The Defendant offered $1,000 to the first person who killed him.
4. The Plaintiff's client performed the condition stated in the Defendant's offer.
5. The Defendant failed to provide the promised payment.
6. The Defendant's claim that the payment was intended to be in Zimbabwean Dollars does not appear in the original offer documented in the Plaintiff's evidence.
7. The Plaintiff therefore alleges that the Defendant failed to perform his contractual obligation without lawful excuse.
8. The Defendant's conduct falls within Part VI, Section 1 of the Redmont Civil Code Act.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. An order requiring the Defendant to pay the promised $1,000 to the Plaintiff's client.
2. Any additional damages or remedy the Court determines to be appropriate under the Redmont Civil Code Act.
3. Any other relief the Court considers just and appropriate.
4. $2500 in legal fees.
5. $2000 in emotional distress fees.

EVIDENCE

Spoiler: P-001: Screenshot of the Defendant's original offer of $1,000

Spoiler: P-002: Screenshots of the Defendant claiming that the payment was intended to be Zimbabwean Dollars.

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 Friday of October 2026

 

[Corvyx]

Proof of representation.

 

[CreeperTD]

Court Order

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff brings before the Court a case which asks for a contract that is, on its face, seemingly illegal, to be enforced. Criminal Code Act Part IV § 13 creates the Criminal Offense of Contract Murder, and is as follows:

13 - Contract Murder
Offence Type: Indictable
Penalty: Up to 200 Penalty Units; Up to 60 minutes imprisonment
A person commits an offence if the person:
(a) gives or receives money, assets, positions of power, or another item of value in exchange for the murder of another citizen.
This offence shall not occur where:
(b) the form of the in-game bounty system is used with no other communication methods.
(c) this offence overrides Incitement and Accessory to a Crime.
Relevant Law:

The court notes that the offense states that it is committed when there is some sort of exchange for the murder of another citizen, rather than a citizen. Regardless of that fact, the offense nevertheless establishes that contracts for murder are generally illegal and, therefore, unenforceable.

For what reason, then, should a contract to commit Murder under CCA Part IV § 3 be enforceable by the courts of Redmont? Any provisions of a contract that are explicitly illegal cannot be enforced, and, seeing as the only apparent provision of the contract presented to the court was to have an individual murdered in order to receive $1000, this contract would not be enforceable.

It seems to the Court that the only way for the Contract that the Plaintiff alleges was created to have the possibility to be enforced is for the Plaintiff to prove that the killing of the Defendant was not murder according to the definition of Redmont Law.

Therefore, the Court orders that Plaintiff present to this Court evidence that the actions of the Plaintiff did not constitute Unlawful Killing under Criminal Terminology Act § 10. If the Plaintiff does not do so to the satisfaction of the Court, this action will be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff has 48 hours to carry out this order.

So Ordered.

 

[Corvyx]

Court Order

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Plaintiff brings before the Court a case which asks for a contract that is, on its face, seemingly illegal, to be enforced. Criminal Code Act Part IV § 13 creates the Criminal Offense of Contract Murder, and is as follows:

The court notes that the offense states that it is committed when there is some sort of exchange for the murder of another citizen, rather than a citizen. Regardless of that fact, the offense nevertheless establishes that contracts for murder are generally illegal and, therefore, unenforceable.

For what reason, then, should a contract to commit Murder under CCA Part IV § 3 be enforceable by the courts of Redmont? Any provisions of a contract that are explicitly illegal cannot be enforced, and, seeing as the only apparent provision of the contract presented to the court was to have an individual murdered in order to receive $1000, this contract would not be enforceable.

It seems to the Court that the only way for the Contract that the Plaintiff alleges was created to have the possibility to be enforced is for the Plaintiff to prove that the killing of the Defendant was not murder according to the definition of Redmont Law.

Therefore, the Court orders that Plaintiff present to this Court evidence that the actions of the Plaintiff did not constitute Unlawful Killing under Criminal Terminology Act § 10. If the Plaintiff does not do so to the satisfaction of the Court, this action will be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff has 48 hours to carry out this order.

So Ordered.

Case Filing

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


UntitledSteve
Plaintiff

v.

MAXXXMAXXX
Defendant

RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
The Plaintiff responds to the Court's Order to Show Cause as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

The Plaintiff acknowledges that the Defendant did not have /consent enabled at the time of the killing.

The Plaintiff further acknowledges that the killing was not performed in lawful self-defence, defence of property under Castle Law, during a government-sanctioned event where combat was an intended component, or as event discipline.

The Plaintiff therefore acknowledges that the killing constituted "Unlawful Killing" under Section 10 of the Criminal Terminology Act.

The Plaintiff further acknowledges that the killing occurred pursuant to the Defendant's in-game offer of $1,000 to any person who killed the Defendant.

The Plaintiff acknowledges that this offer was made through in-game chat and not through the formal in-game bounty system, and therefore does not rely upon the exception contained in Part IV, Section 13(b) of the Criminal Code Act.

The Plaintiff does not contest, for purposes of this Order to Show Cause, that the killing falls within the statutory definition of Murder under Part IV, Section 3 of the Criminal Code Act.

This admission is made in response to the Court's Order to Show Cause and is not intended to constitute a separate criminal plea or criminal proceeding within this civil action.

The Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court separately determine the civil consequences and enforceability of the Defendant's promise and determine the legal effect of Part IV, Section 13 of the Criminal Code Act upon the alleged agreement.

I. PARTIES
1. UntitledSteve, represented by Corvyx is the Plaintiff in this civil action.
2. MAXXXMAXXX is the Defendant in this civil action.

II. FACTS
1. The Defendant offered $1,000 in in-game chat to any person who killed the Defendant.
2. The Plaintiff subsequently killed the Defendant.
3. The Defendant did not have /consent enabled at the time of the killing.
4. The killing was not performed in lawful self-defence, defence of property under Castle Law, during a government-sanctioned event where combat was an intended component, or as event discipline.
5. The agreement was made through in-game chat and not through the formal in-game bounty system.
6. The Court issued an Order to Show Cause requiring the Plaintiff to present evidence that the killing did not constitute Unlawful Killing under Section 10 of the Criminal Terminology Act.
7. The Plaintiff acknowledges that the facts presently before the Court satisfy the statutory definition of Unlawful Killing.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Plaintiff acknowledges that the killing constituted Unlawful Killing under Section 10 of the Criminal Terminology Act.
2. The Plaintiff acknowledges that the killing therefore falls within the statutory definition of Murder under Part IV, Section 3 of the Criminal Code Act.
3. The Plaintiff acknowledges that Part IV, Section 13 of the Criminal Code Act concerns Contract Murder where money, assets, positions of power, or another item of value are given or received in exchange for the murder of another citizen.
4. The Plaintiff acknowledges that the formal in-game bounty system exception under Section 13(b) does not apply to the agreement at issue because the agreement was made through in-game chat.
5. The Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court determine the legal effect of Section 13 upon the alleged agreement and whether the agreement is enforceable as a civil matter.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Court:
1. Accept this Response to the Order to Show Cause.
2. Find that the Plaintiff has adequately responded to the Court's inquiry concerning Unlawful Killing.
3. Determine the legal effect of Criminal Code Act Part IV, Section 13 upon the alleged agreement.
4. Determine whether the alleged agreement is enforceable as a civil matter.
5. Grant such other relief as the Court considers appropriate.

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 Friday day of October 2026

 

[CreeperTD]

Given that the Contract was as such unenforcable, as laid out in the Order to Show Cause, this case is dismissed with prejudice.