Lawsuit: Dismissed byeSprite v. Department of State

[seanboi]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic

CIVIL ACTION

Date: 12/06/21

byeSprite Prime MInisterial Campaign

seanboi

v.

Department of State


I. Description of Case

The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:

The Department of State is seeking to illegally exclude my client from running for the Prime Minister Election. The Department Minister has publicly and officially said this, has agreed with State Prosecutor Dusty_3 in saying that my client is disallowed from running, and clearly has issues with my client thus providing motive to intentionally and wrongfully exclude him from the ballot.


II. Parties

byeSprite

seanboi

Department of State

Dusty_3


III. Sequence of Events
1. byeSprite announces Prime Ministerial campaign;
2. byeSprite was excluded from the Prime Ministerial debate;
3. When asking why, byeSprite was told by the Department of State minister that he does not meet the requirements. The minister cites the clause regarding activity;
4. The Department of State minister then refers to my client as a "troll," which combined with previous run-ins displays a vendetta against byeSprite thus providing motive to keep them out of the election;
5. The Department of State minister then claims that it is "official" that my client is off of the ballot;
6. The Department of State minister than reacts with "Aye" to a message from the State Prosecutor stating that byeSprite has been removed from the ballot and was being a nuisance, thus building upon the aforementioned vendetta;


IV. Claims for Relief
1. There is no legal definition for inactivity; therefore byeSprite cannot be legally inactive in the eyes of the Government.
2. Given that there is no legal definition for inactivity; allowing the Department of State to judge activity based on their own personal views sets an incredibly dangerous precedent
3. The closest legal definition for inactivity is from the Department of Construction; which defines it as being not online for over two weeks. byeSprite has been on within the past two weeks.
4. The Department of State minister stated that "2 weeks is the definition," in context of having been on in the past two weeks, which implies that the Department of State agrees with the Department of Construction when defining inactivity through policies. As my client meets these requirements, they should be allowed to run.

VI. Damages

1. Allow byeSprite to be included on the Prime Minister election ballot;
2. Should the emergency injunction not be granted and the lawsuit concludes after or during the election; I am requesting the election be redone with the proper candidates on the ballot;
3. An official apology to byeSprite and seanboi from the Department of State.


In advancing this form to the court, you acknowledge and concur with the rules of court which highlight the importance of honesty at all times. Moreover, you understand the punishments for breaking these rules and/or committing perjury and deception in the court.

 

[TeddyTaps230]

@Tracefais is hereby summoned to the court to acknowledge the case. If the Defendant, @Tracefais , does not acknowledge the case as a reply in 2 days, the case will close in the Plaintiff's favor.

Court is in Session

This case is presided by Judge MxZxPredatorZx Bear in mind to not reply to court cases unless summoned by the Judge!

 

[Tracefais]

Hi, your honor, dusty_3 will be representing.

 

[TeddyTaps230]

Hi, your honor, dusty_3 will be representing.

I thank you for answering the summon.

Given @Dusty_3 involvement in this case, I am not happy with him representing you as Lawyer.

Please supply the court with another lawyer @Tracefais . You have 48 hours from now.

 

[TeddyTaps230]

Following evidence given to the court by an independent witness to these events, evidence that clearly shows @Dusty_3 has little/no involvement in this case whatsoever, and therefore does not pose a potential for conflictt of interest, I can now retract my earlier statement. I resummon @Dusty_3 to the court. Please proceed with your opening statement

That is all

 

[Dusty_3]

Your honor,

Would it be possible for the defence to have 24 more hours to post our opening statement?

As there was a lot of confusion regarding legal representation, we have only now begun our defence and require more time.

Thank you

 

[TeddyTaps230]

The defence has the usual 48 hours to respond.
Is this long enough or do you require longer? I can be very patient @Dusty_3

 

[Dusty_3]

The defence has the usual 48 hours to respond.
Is this long enough or do you require longer? I can be very patient @Dusty_3

I will have a response in that 48 hour timeframe. Thank you, your honor

 

[TeddyTaps230]

I will have a response in that 48 hour timeframe. Thank you, your honor

No problem. Glad to have you back in the court room.

That is all

 

[TeddyTaps230]

To all that are watching this case, and to the citizens of BusinessCraft.

The court has today decided on the following: (I am unsure as to whether or not this is unprecedented but it needs to happen)

1. An Emergency Injunction is to be put in place immediately, pausing the current election due to the accusation made by the plaintiff.
2. If it is found that the plaintiff was illegally excluded from running, the election shall need to take place again, this time with the plaintiff on the ballot as well.

I ask that the current Prime Minister @stinkycow and the Department of state minister @Tracefais see that this pause in the process is but in place. If you are unable to do so, I request the support of @Koalition in this matter.

I would expect to see an announcement about this in the government announcements channel immediately!

I will await the opening statement from the defense before going any further.

That is all

 

[Koalition]

Hi all

I don't really like stepping in but this time I felt like I had to. This election period has already been way too turbulent than any election before and at times it felt like an incoming headache will come if Discord were to open. Nonetheless, I have decided to override the Judge's decision under the following Constitutional provision:

Server Administration: The Owner:
The Owner is vested with emergency powers and has the ability to veto any decision by any given government branch with a necessary elaboration.

Whatever the definition of activity is, @Sprite wouldn't match it. To have the election postponed for a joke candidate, who recently ran a similar campaign a different nation (that he is actively participating in, in comparison to here) as well is simply mind-boggling to me.

Regardless of the stated above, the campaign is in fact illegitimate as @seanboi (the running mate) does not meet the necessary constitutional requirements to run for office.

Therefore, the above decision has been voided, the poll has been re-opened and the Sprite/Seanboi option will not be added to the ballot.
The polls have been extended for a few hours to remedy the situation and will close at approximately 3pm EST today.

Owner Veto

This decision was overturned by the Owner of BusinessCraft.