Lawsuit: Dismissed walkingpanda111 Vs The Department of Internal Development

[DoubbleKerius]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
CIVIL ACTION
Date: 04/16/2024
walkingpanda111
Attorney - DoubbleKerius

v.

The Department of Internal Development

I. Description of Case
The Plaintiff brings forth the following causes of action and alleges the following against the Defendant:
The report of Suburb property 09-blackwater-ln followed through unlawfully quick causing plaintiff to be unable to present and communicate a attempt to reclaim property in the form of a contract with LemonAuthent stating plantiff as the owner of the property.

II. Parties
1. walkingpanda111
2. Windows_dog
3. SpaceySlayer_
4. LemonAuthent
5. DoID

III. Sequence of Events
1. Plaintiff walkingpanda111 provides LemonAuthent with property 09-blackwater-ln under contract stating walkingpanda111 holds ownership of property.
2. LemonAuthent remains offline for 1 Month 2 days 3 hours.
3. Property Inspector Windows_dog reports 09-Blackwater-Ln as a inactive player property with title 09-Blackwater-Ln | Anytime Eviction on Friday 4/12/24
4. Staff Member SpaceySlayer Follows through with report on 4/13/24

IV. Claims for Relief
1. Under Goverment Land Report Act 4 2(1) states
(2) Players that have a /seen of a period of one month or longer shall be subject to eviction from their Suburb Plots.

1. Players who violate this shall have a right to a courtesy one week’s notice before evicting.

2. walkingpanda111 was unable to present his contract to the DoID to prove his ownership of 09-Blackwater-LN

V. Damages
1. walkingpanda111 returned ownership of Suburbs Property 09-Blackwater-ln
2. The Department of Internal Development ordered to adjust inactivity reports to include the Courtesy of one week.
3. 1500Kr for legal fees
4. 4000Kr for potential loss of property

Evidence:
Property
Property inspector Report

https://www.mcbusinesscraft.com/forum/threads/09-blackwater-ln-anytime-eviction.19762/

Time of reports done and completed by staff (Screenshots taken at time of writing on 4/16/2024 3:30AM


Contract by walkingpanda111 and LemonAuthent

Property Law

Bill: Accepted - Government Land Report Act

Government Land Report Act A Bill To Establish proper guidelines for Land reporting The Parliament of Stratham enacts: Section 1. Short Title (1) This Act is the Government Land Report Act. Section 2. Commencement (1) All provisions shall come into effect upon signage of this bill...

www.mcbusinesscraft.com

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.

 

[MegaMinerM]

@Mickichu , as the Minister of the Department of Internal Development, is hereby summoned to the court to acknowledge the case. If the Defendant, @Mickichu , does not acknowledge the case as a reply in 2 days, the case will close in the Plaintiff's favour.

Since this is a case against the Government, the DoID Minister may choose to have another Government figure or representative represent them in the case.

 

[Ryan_88]

In The Supreme Court of The Stratham Republic
MOTION TO DISMISS
Date: 04/17/24
walkingpanda111
Attorney - DoubbleKerius

v.

The Department of Internal Development

I. Motion To Dismiss
The Defendant motions to dismiss the case, respectfully based off the following:

1. This case is entirely frivolous, the plaintiff failed to protect himself legally in his contract and is now using the government as a scapegoat for his own mistakes. The contract fails to protect the plaintiff in the position of a "landlord" of sorts.

2. If the plaintiff can make large assumptions that if the DoID had given notice to lemonauthent, it would have swiftly provided the plaintiff enough time to reach out and prove ownership, I ask the court to indulge me in this argument. Lemonauthent as of today, has a /seen of 1 month and 7 days. The explicit amount of time needed for an eviction. If windows_dog had given the notice on the 1 month mark today would have been a legal eviction.

3. I personally had actually talked to the plaintiff about this issue prior to this lawsuit where I told him to make an admin ticket and they would give the plot back. I had told him this on the advice of the current Minister of Internal Development. Clearly, staff refused to return the plot so I would have assumed that walkingpanda111 would have turned to the government for help instead of compulsively seeking to start a lawsuit. Yet still claims that he would have reached out to the DoID if there was the notice.

4. Ultimately the case runs down to this, regardless of whether or not the PI who created the report in question failed to give notice or not, the plaintiff failed to even consider reaching out for help from the Department. My government would have had no problem in helping him get his plot back.

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.

 

[Ryan_88]

My evidence of authority to represent the Department of Internal Development is attached here.

 

[MegaMinerM]

I have heard sufficient evidence to render a verdict. This verdict will primarily address the Defendant's motion to dismiss. Additionally, I will determine the appropriate course of action in light of the evidence presented.

Verdict:

After an examination of this case, it appears the core issue revolves around the Plaintiff's claims of wrongful eviction due to inactivity. The Defendant argues that their actions were consistent with established eviction procedures, while the Plaintiff contends that proper notice would have allowed them to rectify the issue.

The Defendant's motion to dismiss raises two points:

1. The Defendant complied with standard eviction procedures, which require evicting property owners who are inactive for over a month. Since the Plaintiff's inactivity exceeded this threshold, the eviction aligned with established regulations.
2. The Plaintiff had alternative remedies available, such as filing an admin ticket, to resolve the issue without resorting to legal action.

Therefore, I will be dismissing this case.

Thank you for your attention.

That is all,
Thank you,
Court Dismissed.