Lawsuit: Dismissed Book Nook Emporium Co. vs Creepsteve05

Status
Not open for further replies.

Matthew100x

Citizen
Lawyer
Donator
Matthew100x
Matthew100x
Lawyer
Hello, your honor, my name is Matthew100x, Partner Attorney of Inperium & Partners at Law.

Today I will be representing the company Book Nook Emporium Co. ran by Blackdragon2020, as the plaintiff. The defendant, Creepsteve05, recently slandered my client by making a false report against him. The report was a false ESL violation. In doing so, the defendant broke multiple laws. My client is seeking compensation as a redress of grievances laid against him.

The client had set up a shop at the top of the United Tower. This particular floor is currently blocked off for renovations led by BlogsWorldExpo and MrFib_. The Defendant trespassed on private property to gain access to my client's shop (Evidence 1 and Evidence 2). I was able to ascertain this evidence because Blackdragon, who had permission and access to that area, let me in to view the store.

In addition to trespassing onto the top floor of the United Tower. The defendant also trespassed physically into my client's shop to take the photos (Evidence 3). As you can see there is a physical barrier that prevents you from getting access to the store. My client had originally placed this barrier to prevent people from buying from the store as he is working out an employment contract with the brewer Soeki (Evidence 4 and Evidence 5). This satisfies issues with the ESL as per the report made by Creepsteve (https://mcbusinesscraft.com/forum/threads/reporting-blackdragon2020.9014/#post-41633). The way the photo was taken in the report suggests that Creepsteve05 had used an elytra to fly under the barrier placed by Blackdragon2020.

Your honor, the defendant trespassed twice onto two different private properties to take evidence of an issue that was not within his scope of responsibilities. In my opinion, the only person who should be making ESL reports are Employment Secretaries, as they are the ones tasked with maintaining the in-game economy. Instead of tipping an ES, he decided to take measures into his own hands. This action shows intent. In his report, he says "I usually wouldn't rat on people like this, but being a brewer is hard enough without unfair competition like this". This quote transforms intent into malicious intent. He is 'ratting' on my client because he is competition, slandering him by calling him unfair competition when he does not know that my client satisfies ESL issues through the Corporate Jobs Act in the hopes that he would get his shop shut down.

Through trespassing and maliciously reporting my client, the defendant finds himself at odds with trespassing laws and the Corporate Slander Act. Due to being aggrieved by the defendant, my client seeks compensation of 1,500 krunas. 750 krunas as compensation for being slandered and for trespassing and 750 for legal fees accrued by this lawsuit.

If there are additional questions about the top floor of United Tower, I request the ability to call on MrFib_ as a witness. He has chat logs of conversations between himself and my client as to why the barrier is in place. He rents the top floor of the United Tower and sublets to my client.

Your honor, I conclude my opening arguments.
 

Attachments

  • Evidence 1.png
    Evidence 1.png
    892.7 KB · Views: 16
  • Evidence 2.png
    Evidence 2.png
    1.7 MB · Views: 16
  • Evidence 3.png
    Evidence 3.png
    1.4 MB · Views: 16
  • evidence 4.png
    evidence 4.png
    573.6 KB · Views: 17
  • evidence 5.png
    evidence 5.png
    578.9 KB · Views: 15

Creepsteve05

Member Of Parliament
Banned
Donator
I deny accusations of maliciously reporting the plaintiff. I reported the plaintiff out of concern for unfair competition with other players, if the shop was in fact illegal. The plaintiff and I exchanged a conversation in private messages where I stated I reported the plaintiff out of concern for unfair competition, and the plaintiff acknowledged I reported them out of concern for other players. I have attached the private message conversation below. I clearly did NOT slander the plaintiff, as I genuinely believed the plaintiff was violating the law. What happened here does not fit the definition of slander, as I did not knowingly give a false statement.

I deny accusations of trespassing; I came in through the roof access, which was not blocked off or posted. I did not know the floor was undergoing redesigning, or that it was not open to the public as there were no signs informing me of it. The sign in 'evidence-4' was not there when I entered the top floor, so 'evidence-4' should be discounted. I take responsibility for gaining entry to the plaintiff's shop despite the barrier, however there were no signs stating I was not allowed to, or that the shop was closed; therefore I though the shop was open.

Your honor, to conclude, I clearly did not maliciously report the plaintiff. I reported the plaintiff out of concern for other players' suffering due to unfair competition if the shop was in fact illegal. I did not slander the plaintiff; if you view the report, I clearly stated my reasoning to why I thought the plaintiff was violating the law, as I genuinely believed. I did not knowingly trespass, as there were no barriers, signs, or other obstacles obstructing entering from the roof

Attached below is the private message conversation the plaintiff and I had after the report was resolved by a staff member. I have highlighted 'Black" so viewers can distinguish our conversation.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2020-08-21 at 9.45.47 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2020-08-21 at 9.45.47 AM.png
    981.1 KB · Views: 20
Last edited:

Matthew100x

Citizen
Lawyer
Donator
Matthew100x
Matthew100x
Lawyer
We settled out of court and we're not pursuing this any further. Your honor, you can close the thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top