Lawsuit: Dismissed Volt Bank v. Yoshi [2026] DCR 42

[dodrio3]

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT CIVIL ACTION

Volt Bank
Plaintiff

v.

Yoshi
Defendant

COMPLAINT The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

On 22/02/2026, the Defendant entered into a loan agreement with Volt Bank. This loan was for the principal sum of $15,000. The Defendant has failed to make any payment towards the debt since the loan was taken. The Defendant's first payment was due on 22/03/2026. They failed to make the payment on this amount within 30 days of the due day, triggering a “Default” in the contract. Giving the Plaintiff permission to initiate legal proceedings “to collect amounts due”.

I. PARTIES

1. Volt Bank - Plaintiff
2. Yoshi - Defendant

II. FACTS

1. On 22/02/2026, the defendant agreed to Volt Bank's loan contract for a loan of $15,000.
2. The Defendant failed to make any payment of “principal, interest, fees, or other amounts” for more than 30 days after the due date.
3. The Defendant put up a drill as collateral on the loan agreement.
4. The Plaintiff contacted the Defendant on 23/03/2026 to inform them that their loan payment was overdue.
5. The Defendant has failed to respond to any collection notifications.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. Breach of Principal The Defendant breached the Agreement by failing to repay the funds provided by the Plaintiffs' Loan.
2. Accured Interest Per Article 4.1 of the loan agreement, the Defendant agreed to pay 10% monthly interest on top of the amount loaned from the plaintiff.
3. Penalty for Late Payments. Per Article 4.3 of the loan agreement, the parties agreed to a 3% daily late fee.
4. The Defendant’s continued non-payment of this clause Collateral Per Article 7.1 of the loan agreement, the Defendant granted the Plaintiff a security interest in the collateral.
5. Due to the Event of Default, the Plaintiff is legally entitled to the immediate possession of said collateral.
6. Bad Faith Per Article 9.1(10) and Article 13.8 of the loan agreement, the total lack of communication and payment from the Defendant suggests a fraudulent and bad faith entry into the contract, justifying punitive measures.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:

1. $15,000 as compensatory damages for the outstanding principal.
2. 10% of the $15,000 ($1,500) per month since 22/02/2026 as compensatory damages for the interest the loan would have matured.
3. 3% of the $15,000 ($450) for every day since 22/03/2026 as compensatory damages for the late payments.
4. The drill was used as collateral to be handed over to the Plaintiff as compensatory damages.
5. $20,000 in punitive damages for the Defendant's bad faith actions.
6. 30% of the value of this case in legal fees.

(Attach evidence and a list of witnesses at the bottom if applicable)

By making this submission, I agree that 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 11th day of May 2026

P-001

Spoiler

Tickety | #1 Discord Ticket Bot

Discover Tickety, the ultimate Discord ticket bot with a user-friendly web dashboard, advanced ticket tool and powerful application feature.

tickety.top

P-002

Spoiler

Volt Loan Yoshi

LOAN AGREEMENT (Secured / Unsecured Term Loan) between Volt Bank, Inc. (the "Lender") and Yoshi (the "Borrower") Dated: 19/02/2026 RECITALS WHEREAS, the Lender is a registered financial institution under the laws of the Commonwealth of Redmont with the capacity to ex...

docs.google.com

P-003

Spoiler

P-004

Spoiler

 

[dodrio3]

Proof of Representation

 

[Muggy21]

The Federal Court doesn't have jurisdiction, I'll transfer to the District Court.

 

[Franciscus]

Court Order

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ORDER — SUA SPONTE DISMISSAL

The District Court, upon examining the complaint, sees the Defendant listed as "Yoshi". The Court has searched public records and is unable to find an individual in Redmont who goes by that name in-game. We likewise cannot find someone who goes by that name on the forums, nor in the DemocracyCraft discord.

If we were to take the name to mean the Minecraft Account called "Yoshi", we would run into a problem: a player who has never joined the server cannot be tried (see: zLost v. Desconfiada [2023] DCR 16) and Yoshi has never joined the server.

Spoiler: Yoshi has not joined the server

The District Court therefore finds the failure to provide the Court with a clear second party sufficient for sua sponte dismissal under Rule 2.2 and Rule 2.1.1. If the intended defendant of this case is an identifiable individual, a plaintiff must give the Court some name (ideally, their correct Minecraft username) by which we can uniquely recognize the Defendant and provide a summons to them.

In the District Court,
Hon. Judge Multiman155