Lawsuit: Adjourned Dartanboy v. Robert [2024] DCR 9

[Dartanboy]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Dartanboy
Plaintiff

v.

Robert
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

Robert assaulted me, and as a result, he stole $100 from me.

I. PARTIES
1. Dartanboy (Plaintiff)
2. Robert (Defendant)

II. FACTS
1. On March 19, Dartanboy was walking around spawn, and Robert approached him [Exhibit A].
2. Robert attacked Dartanboy and stole $100 [Exhibit B].
3. There is no evidence that Robert acted in self defense, and even if he did, that doesn't justify him taking my money.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Assault is illegal under the Violent Offenses Act.
2. I suffered harm as a result of the illegal action - I am not merely suing because Assault occurred.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $100 in compensatory damages, as Robert stole my money.
2. $10,000 in punitive damages, as this is disgusting and outrageous conduct in a free society.

EVIDENCE
Exhibit A:

Spoiler: Robert Threateningly Approaches Dartanman

Exhibit B:

Spoiler: Robert Robs Dartanboy

By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 19th day of March 2024.

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

May I file an amicus brief please?

 

[Robert]

I didn't do it

 

[Nacho]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@Robert is required to appear before the court in the case of Dartanboy v. Robert [2024] DCR 9. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​

 

[Nacho]

May I file an amicus brief please?

The request has been granted. Please have one submitted within 48-hours.

 

[Dartanboy]

Your honor,

I would like to request an in-game trial.

 

[Nacho]

Does the Defendant wish to participate in an in-game trial?

 

[Nacho]

I didn't do it

Please do not speak until addressed by the court... Or risk being held in contempt.

 

[Towloo]

Your honor, I believe I have valuable information that is necessary to this case-may I file an Amicus Brief?

 

[Mask3D_WOLF]

Thank you, your honor, I hope this brief may be insightful to this District Court.

No "Robert" has ever joined the server, which means this trial cannot be conducted as per the verdict of DCR 16 - Appeal Request.

Thank you, your honor, I hope this brief may be insightful to this District Court.

 

[Dartanboy]

Thank you, your honor, I hope this brief may be insightful to this District Court.

No "Robert" has ever joined the server, which means this trial cannot be conducted as per the verdict of DCR 16 - Appeal Request.

Thank you, your honor, I hope this brief may be insightful to this District Court.

 OBJECTION
POINT OF LAW

The Constitution, in Section 13, defines a civil case as "a‌ ‌dispute‌ ‌between‌ ‌two‌ ‌parties,‌ ‌usually‌ ‌seeking‌ ‌compensation"

Robert may not be a Player, but he is a Character, and thus able to be a party in a civil case.

Similarly, businesses and the Government are not players, but are still able to be sued.

 

[Robert]

Thank you, your honor, I hope this brief may be insightful to this District Court.

No "Robert" has ever joined the server, which means this trial cannot be conducted as per the verdict of DCR 16 - Appeal Request.

Thank you, your honor, I hope this brief may be insightful to this District Court.

OBJECTION MISLEADING

I cannot join the server as I have never left the server.

 

[Robert]

Your honor,

I would like to request an in-game trial.

I am unable to attend. I have robberies other commitments to attend to.

 

[Robert]

I will be represented by @bindi

 

[Bindi]

OPENING STATEMENT

FACTS

1. Robert is a blind individual who has meticulously memorized the path around spawn, which he walks daily as part of his routine. This path is essential for his independence and well-being.
2. On March 19, Robert was following his usual route when Dartanboy, without provocation, obstructed his path and acted in a threatening manner, causing Robert to fear for his safety.
3. In an instinctive response to the perceived threat, Robert acted in self-defense, which is his legal right under the Self-Defense Act of Redmont.
4. Following the incident, Dartanboy has engaged in a campaign of defamation, falsely accusing Robert of assault and theft, without any evidence to substantiate these claims.
5. The false accusations have caused Robert significant emotional distress and have damaged his reputation within the community, where he is known as a peaceful and law-abiding citizen.

DEFENSES

1. Robert asserts that any contact with Dartanboy was purely defensive and incidental to Dartanboy’s aggressive approach and threatening behavior.
2. Robert denies any and all allegations of theft, as he had no motive or ability to identify, locate, or take possession of Dartanboy’s money, given his visual impairment.

COUNTERCLAIM

1. Robert has been defamed by Dartanboy’s false statements, which were made with malice and the intent to harm Robert’s reputation.
2. The defamatory statements have caused Robert to suffer emotional distress, anxiety, and have impeded his ability to live independently and securely.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Defendant/Counterclaimant, Robert, respectfully requests the following relief:

1. A declaratory judgment that Dartanboy’s allegations are false and defamatory.
2. Compensatory damages in the amount of $100 for the money wrongfully claimed by Dartanboy.
3. Punitive damages in the amount of $50,000 to deter Dartanboy and others from engaging in similar defamatory conduct in the future.
4. An order for Dartanboy to issue a public apology to Robert for the false allegations and the distress caused.
5. Any other relief that the Court deems just and proper.

 

[Nacho]

Your honor, I believe I have valuable information that is necessary to this case-may I file an Amicus Brief?

The request has been granted. Please have one submitted within 48-hours.

 

[Nacho]

 OBJECTION
POINT OF LAW

The Constitution, in Section 13, defines a civil case as "a‌ ‌dispute‌ ‌between‌ ‌two‌ ‌parties,‌ ‌usually‌ ‌seeking‌ ‌compensation"

Robert may not be a Player, but he is a Character, and thus able to be a party in a civil case.

Similarly, businesses and the Government are not players, but are still able to be sued.

The objection is sustained.

Just as Pinocchio said those many years ago. He wishes to be a real boy. Character, player or entity they appeared before the court and have earned the ability to be heard.

The brief will be struck from the record.

 

[Nacho]

OBJECTION MISLEADING

I cannot join the server as I have never left the server.

As my previous ruling. The objection in turn is also sustained.

 

[Nacho]

I am unable to attend. I have robberies other commitments to attend to.

As the defendant has indicated they are preoccupied with other items and unable to participate in a in-game trial.

The request by the plaintiff is denied.

 

[Nacho]

As the defendant has provided an answer to the complaint the court will not be moving into Discovery.

Discovery last 7 days. Should both parties agree discovery can end early.

 

[Bindi]

Noting that the only thing left to discover is that my client is not guilty, we request to skip discovery and for summary judgement

 

[Towloo]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
AMICUS BRIEF

Your honor,
Robert is an NPC. This means he doesn't do anything outside of his programming. I can assure you that his programming takes money out of the account only when a robbery is attempted, making the punitive damages that Dartanboy is requesting foolish. Additionally, the Robert account is controlled by the DC government account (DCGovernment), and Dartanboy is suing the wrong person as Robert is part of the government.

 

[Dartanboy]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
AMICUS BRIEF

Your honor,
Robert is an NPC. This means he doesn't do anything outside of his programming. I can assure you that his programming takes money out of the account only when a robbery is attempted, making the punitive damages that Dartanboy is requesting foolish. Additionally, the Robert account is controlled by the DC government account (DCGovernment), and Dartanboy is suing the wrong person as Robert is part of the government.

OBJECTION
Speculation | Foundation

Towloo is an NPC - a non-player character - but that doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't do anything outside of his programming. Clearly, he has had a conversation with Bindi and sought representation in Court.

Secondly, even if he can't do anything outside of his programming, Towloo is not a developer on DemocracyCraft. He is speculating on what is and is not possible for Robert to do.

I request this amicus brief be struck.

EDIT: Your honor, I accidentally said "Towloo is an NPC." This should say "Robert is an NPC."

 

[Dartanboy]

Noting that the only thing left to discover is that my client is not guilty, we request to skip discovery and for summary judgement

The Plaintiff refuses summary judgement, as the Defense has laid a counterclaim that must be addressed.

I'm fine to skip Discovery, though.

 

[Dartanboy]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
AMICUS BRIEF

Your honor,
Robert is an NPC. This means he doesn't do anything outside of his programming. I can assure you that his programming takes money out of the account only when a robbery is attempted, making the punitive damages that Dartanboy is requesting foolish. Additionally, the Robert account is controlled by the DC government account (DCGovernment), and Dartanboy is suing the wrong person as Robert is part of the government.

OBJECTION
RELEVANCE

Robert may have chosen to donate his stolen money to the Government - but that is irrelevant. Robert is the one who stole my money - not the Government. Robert is the correct Defendant.

 

[Nacho]

OBJECTION
Speculation | Foundation

Towloo is an NPC - a non-player character - but that doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't do anything outside of his programming. Clearly, he has had a conversation with Bindi and sought representation in Court.

Secondly, even if he can't do anything outside of his programming, Towloo is not a developer on DemocracyCraft. He is speculating on what is and is not possible for Robert to do.

I request this amicus brief be struck.

EDIT: Your honor, I accidentally said "Towloo is an NPC." This should say "Robert is an NPC."

The objection is sustained.

The brief is struck.

 

[Nacho]

OBJECTION
RELEVANCE

Robert may have chosen to donate his stolen money to the Government - but that is irrelevant. Robert is the one who stole my money - not the Government. Robert is the correct Defendant.

As the previous objection was sustained. This, in turn, is further sustained.

 

[Nacho]

As both parties were unable to agree on summary judgment, the request is denied.

Both parties agreed to the skipping of Discovery. We will not be transitioning into Opening statements.

The plaintiff has 72 hours to provide their opening statement to the court.

 

[Dartanboy]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

Your honor, I will address each point made by the Defense.

Robert is a blind individual who has meticulously memorized the path around spawn, which he walks daily as part of his routine. This path is essential for his independence and well-being.

There is no evidence that Robert is blind. This could very-well be false. Furthermore, how do you suppose Robert could have memorized the path around the spawn and the capitol unless he could see it!

On March 19, Robert was following his usual route when Dartanboy, without provocation, obstructed his path and acted in a threatening manner, causing Robert to fear for his safety.

There is no evidence supporting this claim. Exhibit A clearly shows Robert threateningly approaching me. Even assuming Robert is blind - which there is no evidence of - my mere presence on the sidewalk where I allegedly "obstructed his path" does not rise to the level of "a criminal action against the individual or property [being] directly made, threatened, or implied" which is required for Self Defense (see Act of Congress - Violent Offences Act)

In an instinctive response to the perceived threat, Robert acted in self-defense, which is his legal right under the Self-Defense Act of Redmont.

There is no evidence that Robert acted in self-defense. Furthermore, as stated previously, my alleged obstruction of Robert's path does not rise to the level of threatening, implying, or actually committing a criminal action.

Another argument against this is that in Redmont, players and NPCs alike have the astonishing ability to walk through each other with little to no physical effects. This means that even if I were obstructing Robert's path, he could walk right through me with no consequences. Instead of doing this, however, Robert decided to verbally abuse me and steal my money.

Following the incident, Dartanboy has engaged in a campaign of defamation, falsely accusing Robert of assault and theft, without any evidence to substantiate these claims.

Your honor, this claim is simply absurd. Robert stole my money - and I have shown this clearly in Exhibit B. This is not Defamation.

The false accusations have caused Robert significant emotional distress and have damaged his reputation within the community, where he is known as a peaceful and law-abiding citizen.

Your honor, Robert may be emotionally distressed, but this is only because he chose to mug me and steal my money, and I have chosen to hold him accountable for his actions! I have broken no laws in filing this lawsuit, which counsel Bindi is claiming to be a "campaign of defamation."

Robert asserts that any contact with Dartanboy was purely defensive and incidental to Dartanboy’s aggressive approach and threatening behavior.

Once again, self-defense was not applicable as my actions were not sufficient to demand self-defense from Robert.

Robert denies any and all allegations of theft, as he had no motive or ability to identify, locate, or take possession of Dartanboy’s money, given his visual impairment.

Your honor, this is simply further evidence that Robert is not actually blind! It can be seen quite clearly in Exhibit B that Robert stole my money.

Thank you.

 

[Nacho]

The defense has 72 hours to submit their opening statements.

 

[Anthony]

AMICUS BRIEF
I request to file an amicus brief

 

[Dartanboy]

 OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure

Twice now, Amicus Briefs have been weaponized by Robert-sympathizers in an attempt to derail this case. I request that any requests for Amicus Briefs are required be submitted with an explanation of why they are requesting one.

 

[Anthony]

I will be more than happy to provide the court with my reasoning. it has to do with the prayer for reliefs and the “defendants” ability to even be order to pay if in the plaintiffs favor and the defendants counterclaim.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your honor, I believe I have valuable information that is necessary to this case-may I file an Amicus Brief?

 

[Dartanboy]

I will be more than happy to provide the court with my reasoning. it has to do with the prayer for reliefs and the “defendants” ability to even be order to pay if in the plaintiffs favor and the defendants counterclaim.

 OBJECTION
Relevance

Robert's "ability ... to pay" is not relevant. The Court's only purpose is to the interpret the law - not make judgments based solely on how much money people have or if they will be able to pay.

Clearly, Robert should've thought about the consequences of his actions before doing this.

 

[Anthony]

“ability to pay” probably isn’t the best wording your honor. But my amicus brief will explain the wrongs about the prayer for relief and counter claim

 

[Nacho]

We will have an order in the court. At this time, I will be denying both amicus briefs.

The court's role is to allow individuals and entities to be provided their day in court. While some might not like the notion of being fair to all, this court will ensure the rights are protected for all entities participating within the commonwealth realm.

Any future Amicus Brief requests that are submitted to the court will more than likely be denied. While the court appreciates the engagement and dedication members of the community have in wishing for justice, it is apparent that the Plaintiff is perfectly fine with the case proceeding.

The objection filed by the plaintiff was subsequently overruled due to my denying the Amicus Brief altogether.

The defendant still has approximately 48 hours to provide their opening statements.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your Honor,
The defendant has aquired me as their counsol as their previous cousol was hit by a bus and no longer has legs to make it to court.

I request a 24 hour extension while I get familiar with the case.

Thank you, your Honor.

 

[Dartanboy]

Your Honor,
The defendant has aquired me as their counsol as their previous cousol was hit by a bus and no longer has legs to make it to court.

I request a 24 hour extension while I get familiar with the case.

Thank you, your Honor.

 OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure

Without proof of consent to represent, there is no evidence Robert actually hired Ms. Heart.

Robert has already appeared before the court and declared Bindi is his counsel.

I ask this request be ignored.

 

[Nacho]

Your Honor,
The defendant has aquired me as their counsol as their previous cousol was hit by a bus and no longer has legs to make it to court.

I request a 24 hour extension while I get familiar with the case.

Thank you, your Honor.

It is unfortunate to hear of Bindis demise. I will grant the 24 hour extension.

Upon your filing please also provide proof of representation as well.

 

[Nacho]

 OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure

Without proof of consent to represent, there is no evidence Robert actually hired Ms. Heart.

Robert has already appeared before the court and declared Bindi is his counsel.

I ask this request be ignored.

The objection is overruled.

Should the plaintiff wish to change their representation that is their right. The defense has been requested to provide proof of representation.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

Your Honor,

While it is undeniable that stealing is morally reprehensible, it is equally crucial to ensure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice. In this case, the accusation against the blind man lacks substantial evidence and fails to meet the burden of proof required for a conviction.

Firstly, the mere act of walking towards the defendant does not inherently imply guilt or criminal intent on the part of the blind man. Without clear evidence demonstrating intent or opportunity to steal, it is unreasonable to assume culpability solely based on physical proximity.

Furthermore, the absence of conclusive evidence linking the blind man, Robert, to the theft of $100 from the defendant's account undermines the defendant's case. The ambiguous statement "nice try, Next time you will think twice" lacks specificity and could have been directed at anyone present, rendering it insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Moreover, the defense rightly highlights the possibility of alternative explanations for the missing money, such as someone else accessing the defendant's account. Without definitive proof tying Robert to the theft, convicting him would be unjust and contrary to the principles of a fair trial.

In light of these considerations, I urge the court to carefully weigh the evidence presented and uphold the presumption of innocence for the accused. It is imperative to uphold the principles of justice and ensure that individuals are not wrongfully convicted based on insufficient or circumstantial evidence.

Thank you, Your Honor.

 

[Dartanboy]

Your Honor,

While it is undeniable that stealing is morally reprehensible, it is equally crucial to ensure that justice is served fairly and without prejudice. In this case, the accusation against the blind man lacks substantial evidence and fails to meet the burden of proof required for a conviction.

Firstly, the mere act of walking towards the defendant does not inherently imply guilt or criminal intent on the part of the blind man. Without clear evidence demonstrating intent or opportunity to steal, it is unreasonable to assume culpability solely based on physical proximity.

Furthermore, the absence of conclusive evidence linking the blind man, Robert, to the theft of $100 from the defendant's account undermines the defendant's case. The ambiguous statement "nice try, Next time you will think twice" lacks specificity and could have been directed at anyone present, rendering it insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Moreover, the defense rightly highlights the possibility of alternative explanations for the missing money, such as someone else accessing the defendant's account. Without definitive proof tying Robert to the theft, convicting him would be unjust and contrary to the principles of a fair trial.

In light of these considerations, I urge the court to carefully weigh the evidence presented and uphold the presumption of innocence for the accused. It is imperative to uphold the principles of justice and ensure that individuals are not wrongfully convicted based on insufficient or circumstantial evidence.

Thank you, Your Honor.

OBJECTION
BREACH OF PROCEDURE

Snowy_Heart has failed to provide proof of representation.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

OBJECTION
BREACH OF PROCEDURE

Snowy_Heart has failed to provide proof of representation.

Sorry your Honor.,
I had it attached im not sure why it didnt.upload with my opening statements.

 

[Nacho]

OBJECTION
BREACH OF PROCEDURE

Snowy_Heart has failed to provide proof of representation.

Objection is overruled we’ve all felt the draw backs of the forums breaking from time to time.

 

[Nacho]

As no witnesses were listed within discovery I will give both parties a final chance to submit witnesses to the court before moving to closing.

Please provide the court with any witnesses within the next 24 hours.

 

[Dartanboy]

Your Honor,
The defendant has aquired me as their counsol as their previous cousol was hit by a bus and no longer has legs to make it to court.

I request a 24 hour extension while I get familiar with the case.

Thank you, your Honor.

OBJECTION
PERJURY

I have located Bindi, and she appears perfectly healthy and definitely has legs.

 

[Nacho]

As either side did not provide any witnesses the court will be progressing to closing statements.

The plaintiff has 48 hours to provide their closing statement.

 

[Nacho]

OBJECTION
PERJURY

I have located Bindi, and she appears perfectly healthy and definitely has legs.
View attachment 42543

The Defense may respond to the objection.

 

[Snowy_Heart]

The Defense may respond to the objection.

Your Honor,
It appears that bindi's leg replacment surgery went well. I wish her all the best in her recovery.