Lawsuit: Dismissed Walmart v Nexus Bank

[TokyoSAP]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 05/02/25
Walmart
TokyoSAP (Wright.Co Lawyer, Representing)

v.

Nexus Bank

I. Description of Case

Plaintiff brings forward this lawsuit against Nexus Bank for the wrongful withholding of corporate funds belonging to Walmart following the permanent ban of a former individual account holder. Plaintiff seeks relief establishing that the withheld funds are the rightful property of Walmart and its management, and wishes the court to compel Nexus Bank to release all funds, including accrued interest, to Plaintiff immediately.

II. Parties

1. Walmart, Plaintiff (TokyoSAP representing).
2. Nexus Bank, Defendant.

III. Sequence of Events

1. On the 8th of January 2025, the former CEO of Walmart was permanently banned and the bank subsequently froze the company account belonging to Walmart.
2. When the plaintiff attempted to access the corporate funds as the CFO and newly appointed CEO, he was denied by Nexus Bank.

IV. Claims for Relief

1. Walmart is a separate legal entity, independent of any individual account holder. The player who deposited the company funds into Nexus Bank, Saarthigaming, did not personally own the assets of Walmart, but merely managed transactions on its behalf and received a large percentage of the company’s revenue.
2. Plaintiff, as the appointed CFO of Walmart prior to the ban (evidence 1), had full control of all company assets and did not require any upper management approval to withdraw funds.
3. Nexus Bank justified its refusal by citing Section 9.2 of its Terms and Conditions, which applies to banned personal account holders but does not reference or govern corporate accounts, making this withholding of company property a clear breach of contract.
4. Nexus Bank does not require corporate accounts to be legally registered companies under a specific player, yet has treated Walmart as inseparable from Saarthigaming contrary to its own policies.
5. Walmart has ongoing financial obligations, including employee salaries (evidence 2), supplier payments, and operational costs, and has been impacted operationally by Nexus Bank’s withholding.

V. Damages

1. Release of all company funds held by Nexus Bank, including interest (KR 41,200), to the Plaintiff immediately.
2. 2000kr for impact on company finances
3. 1500kr Legal Fees

Evidence 1: Walmart CFO Announcement

Evidence 2: Staff Payment Due Notice

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.

 

[Cherub54321]

@MegaMinerM is hereby summoned to the court to acknowledge the case. If the Defendant, @MegaMinerM , 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 Cherub54321 Bear in mind to not reply to court cases unless summoned by the Judge!

 

[MegaMinerM]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
MOTION TO DISMISS
Date: 02/07/2025

Walmart
TokyoSAP

v.

Nexus Bank

I. Motion To Dismiss

The Defendant motions to dismiss the case, respectfully based off the following:

1. The Plaintiff alleges that the company is a separate legal entity, independent of any individual account holder, however past Department of Economy precedent has shown that business owners need to be real individuals. Walmart was registered and approved with Saarthigaming as the owner of the company. Saarthigaming however, was permanently banned on the 8th January 2025 for a Verbal offence. Server rules state that “Banned players also have no right to request what happens with their property”, this includes businesses (Server Rules Businesses). On the 28th January however the plaintiff however self proclaimed themselves as the new owner of the company, citing the previous owner (Saarthigaming) had approved the transfer, this directly contradicts the rules of this server.
2. The Plaintiff also states that they had full control of all company assets and did not require any upper management approval to withdraw funds, the only proof they show however is an announcement showing the appointment of the plaintiff as the Chief Financial Officer of the company, all other claims are merely allegations and show no evidence that the plaintiff has the authority to access the funds.
3. The Plaintiff also claims that Section 9.2 of Nexus Bank’s Terms and Conditions only apply to personal account holders but does not reference or govern corporate accounts, however Section 9 of the Terms and Conditions (Nexus Bank T&Cs) is called “Savings Accounts”, applying to Personal, Company, and Certificate of Deposit Savings Accounts, there is nothing that would affirm with the Plaintiff’s allegation that this only applying to personal savings accounts. Furthermore, Nexus Bank’s information section (Nexus Bank Savings Accounts) showcases the different type of services that Nexus Bank offers, within these services it is clearly visible that the Personal, Company, and Certificate of Deposit Savings Accounts are under the “Savings Accounts” Section. The Plaintiff has also not shown Section 9.2 of Nexus Bank’ Terms and Conditions and has not shown how it only applies to personal savings accounts.
4. The Plaintiff shows no proof on how or even if Nexus Bank does not require corporate accounts to be legally registered companies under a specific player.
5. The Plaintiff also shows no proof regarding any “ongoing financial obligation” or “employee salaries, supplier payments, and operational costs”with the only evidence provided being a screenshot of a bot with no further context. Additionally, the Plaintiff has also not shown how any of these alleged payments have been impacted by Nexus Bank.
6. The Plaintiff has shown no concrete evidence proving any of the baseless allegations they have brought forward.

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.

 

[Cherub54321]

Good Afternoon,

I am going to be upholding the motion to dismiss. Our server rules clearly state that banned players have no rights to request what happens to their property (after discussion with the staff team businesses are considered property, as well as any assets the business may own). After some quick investigation of my own it is clear that the banned player requested that the ownership of Walmart was to be transferred to TokyoSAP following his ban (attachment 1), which is not in line with server rules. Given that the player who created the account with nexus bank has been banned, the contract between them and the bank has been broken, which means that nexus bank has no legal obligation to return the money within it to said player.

With regards to the business Walmart, any properties or assets belonging to to Saarthigaming are to be transferred by the staff team to the government. TokyoSAP may continue to use the brand name, however a new business registration will be required with a company HQ owned by TokyoSAP in order for the company to be registered with the DoE.

Court Dismissed

This case was presided by Judge Cherub54321