Lawsuit: Adjourned Danroth27 vs Rocketlol

Status
Not open for further replies.

TeddyTaps230

Citizen
Banned
Executive Office
Department of Justice
Lawyer
Donator
TeddyTaps230
TeddyTaps230
Special Advisor
In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 10/09/2021

Danroth27
MxZxPredatorZx

v.

Rocketlol
I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
The Defendant ignored my clients request not to kill his Villagers that were housed in his building. Instead he barged his way into the building and killed two villagers after being asked not too.
II. Parties
1. Danroth27
Rocketlol

III. Sequence of Events
I was playing on the server and he came to my base to say hello and that he wanted to “check out my villagers”. When I showed them to him he said they were garbage and that they were illegal. I had not realized this so we expanded the space and made it legal again. Then he started pestering me about killing a villager to which I FIRMLY denied, stating that he could not. Over the next 5 minutes he attempted to persuade me and each time I said no. This continued until eventually rocket cracked breaking open my house for the villagers and murdering several. After this I asked him on discord how many villagers he had killed to which he said 2. I asked him why he had done this and he told me it was to get a rise out of me.
IV. Claims for Relief
1. After continuously requesting that Rocketlol did not kill the villagers he continued on to do so anyway.
V. Damages
1. An apology from Rocketlol
2. We would like 1000kr in compensation for the murder of the villagers and to cover the legal fees of this matter.

Witnesses
1.
Nightmare98765
2. Peachlemon
(Attach evidence and a list of witnesses at the bottom if applicable)

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.
 

Attachments

  • image0.jpg
    image0.jpg
    63.8 KB · Views: 17
  • image0.jpg
    image0.jpg
    53.7 KB · Views: 20

Cooleagles2005

Citizen
Lawyer
Cooleagles
Cooleagles
Lawyer
Good Evening,

@rocketlol is hereby summoned to the court to acknowledge the case. If the Defendant, @rocketlol, 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 Cooleagles Bear in mind to not reply to court cases unless summoned by the Judge!
 

Cooleagles2005

Citizen
Lawyer
Cooleagles
Cooleagles
Lawyer
Good Evening,

I don't know I'm aloud to comment here, but rocketlol was perma banned.
Firstly, you are not allowed to respond to the thread, for if you do so you can be charged with contempt of court. However, the court thanks you for your due diligence and assistance, just let that be a note for the next time.

Now, onto the case.
It has taken me some time to come up with a verdict because of the legality of the situation itself. Currently, there is no law in our legal system which states that the above actions of the Defendant are illegal. It surprised me to find that it wasn't part of the numerous animal abuse edits, or any griefing laws/rules that I came upon. (If there happens to be one that I missed somehow, one can always feel free to correct me).

Therefore, I urge our up and coming parliament to look into the situation and come up with proper legislation. If jurisdiction of said law were to fall on the courts, the law would either be written 1 of 2 ways. A civil law that 2 citizens would handle, meaning there would be no punishment for the perpetrator; alternatively, a criminal one where a prosecutor would charge someone. The question overall is whether or not the law is worthy of punishment for its perpetrators, a question I will leave for parliament to ponder. When Parliament is in session they are more than welcome to speak with me further on it.

My final verdict is a default ruling in favor of the plaintiff; however, seeing that there is no law in our books that mentions this, it would be unjust of me towards the Defendant to offer relief. Therefore, no relief will be rewarded to the plaintiff.

Thank you, that is all
Court Adjourned

Court Adjourned

This case was presided by Judge Cooleagles
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top