Lawsuit: Dismissed The People of Stratham, Stratham Law Association v. Vasilevskiy1 (Zhukhov123)

[flyingzebra7]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 4/19/23

The People of Stratham
Stratham Law Association (flyingzebra7)

v.
Vasilevskiy1 (Zhukhov123)

I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
The defendant has violated the Corporate Advertisement Act Section VII subsection 3 by not waiting for 3 advertisements to pass in the "Government-Provided Advertisement Channel" known as #business-advertisements OR by waiting 48 hours to pass before posting another advertisement.

II. Parties
1. Stratham Law Association (flyingzebra7)
2. Vasilevskiy1 (Zhukhov123)

III. Sequence of Events
1. The defendant posted their advertisement
2. They waited, but did not wait for the requirements of at least 3 other advertisements passing OR waiting 48 hours
3. The defendant posted another advertisement, not following the requirements
4. Process repeats

IV. Claims for Relief
1. The defendant broke Section VII of the Corporate Advertisement Act

V. Damages
1. The defendant receives punishment on the third offence listed at the end of Section VII of the Corporate Advertisement Act
2. 250Kr in Legal Fees

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.

 

[Zhukov123]

9

 

[Zhukov123]

Your Honor, I apologize for speaking before being summoned, It will not happen again.

 

[ColonelKai]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
Writ of Summons

@Zhukov123 is hereby summoned to the Court of the Stratham Republic, and must appear in the court in the following 48 hours starting at the time of this summon's sending. If the defendant fails to adhere to the conditions of the summons hereby set, the court will move forward with a default judgement.

 

[Ryan_88]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic
MOTION TO DISMISS
Date: 04/26/23

The People of Stratham
Stratham Law Association (flyingzebra7)

v.

Vasilevskiy1 (Zhukhov123)


I. Motion To Dismiss
The Defendant motions to dismiss the case, respectfully based off the following:
1. Flyingzebra7 is not the Attorney general nor is he apart of the AG's office. He has no authority to represent the people of Stratham.
2. The specific section the plaintiff has sited in their case evidence of the Corporate Advertisement Act is relating to "GPAC" or "Government-Provided Advertisement Channels" as stated in the CAA. Therefore breaking this section is an offense against the government which requires a representative of the government to seek these charges.
3. The Rules and Laws page is still yet to be updated to reflect the changes set by this new law by the Speaker of Parliament. How can we expect citizens to scroll through hundreds of bills passed by parliament just to know if they're breaking the law or not.

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.

 

[ColonelKai]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic

The Plaintiff has 48 hours to respond to the motion to dismiss.

In the meanwhile, for the sake of integrity, I would like the Defense to provide evidence that the representation has been consented by the individual.

 

[flyingzebra7]

Your honor,
I agree with the defense that as I am not the AG I don't have authority to represent the people of Stratham. At the time of posting this, there was no attorney general.

If you are going to dismiss the case, I request you also strike The People of Stratham, HunterHo LLP [ Poemhunter ] v The Department of State from the record as poemhunter had no authority to represent the people of Stratham.

 

[Ryan_88]

Your honor here is the proof that I have been authorized by the defendant to represent them in court.

 

[Ryan_88]

Your honor, may I respond to the plaintiffs request of striking The People of Stratham, HunterHo LLP [ Poemhunter ] v The Department of State?

 

[ColonelKai]

In The Distinguished Court of The Stratham Republic

After a discussion with my colleague, the courts have decided that the Motion to Dismiss is sustained on the grounds that the enforcement of such a law does indeed fall upon the jurisdiction of the Office of the Attorney General.

However, the case The People of Stratham, HunterHo LLP [ Poemhunter ] v The Department of State will not be overturned as the courts have unanimously agreed that it's verdict does not reinforce the ideology that despite the introduction of the Office of Attorney General, Private Parties may represent the government.

I hereby dismiss this case.