Lawsuit: Dismissed Naezaratheus v. lucaaasserole [2025] FCR 35

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Naezaratheus (Represented by Mezimori)
Plaintiff

v.

lucaaasserole (aka Luca)
Defendant


COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

This lawsuit concerns defamatory statements made by the Defendant, lucaaasserole, against the Plaintiff, Naezaratheus, in a public Discord conversation. The Defendant has engaged in slander by making false statements regarding the Plaintiff's financial standing and legal status, directly causing the Plaintiff to lose a valuable art purchase transaction for which the Plaintiff had a strong personal interest and was willing to pay substantially more than other buyers.

Click to expand...

I. PARTIES
1. Naezaratheus (Plaintiff)
2. lucaaasserole (Defendant)


II. FACTS
1. On April 7, 2025, in a public Discord conversation regarding artwork created by the user "siti", both the Plaintiff and Defendant expressed interest in purchasing the artwork.

2. The Plaintiff, a serious art collector with genuine appreciation for the pieces, made an offer to purchase all four original artwork pieces from siti, stating "I want all 4 I will give u the best price" (as evidenced in P-001).

3. The Plaintiff's strong desire to acquire the original artworks was demonstrated repeatedly throughout the conversation, with statements such as "ALL or nothing i give good price" and "Idc I want the painting" (as shown in P-002 and P-004).

4. Only after the Plaintiff made this offer did the Defendant begin making defamatory statements about the Plaintiff, demonstrating clear malicious intent to interfere with the Plaintiff's personal transaction.

5. The Defendant stated "what with your stolen money?" when the Plaintiff offered to pay for the artwork (as evidenced in P-003).

6. The Defendant then explicitly stated "all of this guys money is from scamming vanguard" in reference to the Plaintiff (as shown in P-003).

7. The Defendant further stated that the Plaintiff is "in a law suit right now" and "being sued for like 20 million or something" (as shown in P-003).

8. When the Plaintiff continued to express interest in purchasing the artwork, the Defendant escalated the defamatory claims by stating "naezartheus isnt meant to have his money lmao. If you sell it to him you could get fined for money laundering" and claimed the Plaintiff's money was "literally stolen" (as evidenced in P-004).

9. The Defendant's statements directly and provably interfered with the Plaintiff's transaction, as evidenced by siti's subsequent response: "i dont want to sell you all four 1 of 1 because Luca is a fellow cure fan" (as shown in P-005).

10. Despite the Plaintiff offering $20,000 for the original copies—ten times the amount the Defendant offered—siti didn’t sell the originals to the Plaintiff due to the Defendant's false allegations (as evidenced in P-005 and P-006).

11. The Plaintiff's offer of $20,000 for the original artworks compared to the Defendant's $2,000 for mere copies demonstrates both the Plaintiff's genuine desire to own these specific pieces and the substantial opportunity loss suffered as a direct result of the Defendant's defamatory statements. The Plaintiff was willing to pay ten times the market value to obtain these unique pieces, underscoring their particular value to the Plaintiff beyond mere financial worth.

12. The Defendant successfully prevented the Plaintiff from acquiring unique, one-of-a-kind original artworks that cannot be obtained elsewhere and for which the Plaintiff had a strong personal interest.

13. While there is an ongoing lawsuit involving the Plaintiff and Vanguard & Co (Vanguard & Co v Naezaratheus [2025] FCR 32), the Defendant's characterisation of the situation was false and misleading.

14. The Defendant had no factual basis for claiming that the Plaintiff's money was "literally stolen" or the result of "scamming."

15. The Defendant had no factual basis for claiming that selling artwork to the Plaintiff would result in "money laundering" fines.


III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Defendant made false statements through Discord messages that defamed the Plaintiff's reputation, profession, and financial standing in violation of the No More Defamation Act. The Defendant's claims that the Plaintiff's money was "literally stolen", obtained by "scamming Vanguard", and that selling to the Plaintiff would lead to "money laundering" fines constitute textbook slander as defined in Section 3(a) of the Act.

2. The Federal Court in xLayzur & Krix v. Politico [2023] FCR 62 established that "direct, specific, defamatory statements" are not protected speech. The Defendant's statements constitute specific, verifiable falsehoods about particular actions (theft, fraud, and money laundering), not broad characterizations or opinions. Unlike the protected political speech in Vernicia v. Tonga1 [2025] FCR 24, these statements directly allege specific criminal conduct with no factual basis.

3. Unlike in Vernicia v. Tonga1 [2025] FCR 24 where harm was deemed "speculative", this case presents concrete evidence of direct harm. As shown in P-005, siti explicitly refused to sell the original artworks to the Plaintiff because of her relationship with the Defendant, a decision that followed immediately after the Defendant's defamatory statements. This establishes clear causation between the defamation and the Plaintiff's substantial loss.

4. Under Section 7(1)(a)(I) of the Legal Damages Act, the Plaintiff is entitled to consequential damages for humiliation. The Defendant publicly disgraced the Plaintiff by falsely labeling him a criminal engaged in "scamming" and possessing "stolen money" in front of multiple witnesses. This humiliation was purposefully inflicted to diminish the Plaintiff's standing and credibility within the community.

5. The Defendant violated the Plaintiff's constitutional right to equal protection under Section 33(13) of the Constitution, which guarantees that "Every citizen is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without unfair discrimination and, in particular, without unfair discrimination based on social status." By falsely characterizing the Plaintiff as a criminal engaged in financial crimes, the Defendant created social discrimination that directly prevented the Plaintiff from participating equally in commerce, effectively creating a subordinate class of citizen who cannot freely engage in legitimate transactions.

6. The Defendant's defamatory statements were made with clear malicious intent to prevent the Plaintiff from completing a legitimate transaction. The direct causal link between the Defendant's false statements and the Plaintiff's loss is clearly established by siti's explicit statement that she would not sell the original artworks to the Plaintiff "because luca is a fellow cure fan" - a decision made only after the Defendant's defamatory claims. This interference deprived the Plaintiff of unique, one-of-a-kind artwork for which he offered $20,000 - ten times the Defendant's offer.


IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:

1. $50,000 in Compensatory Damages, including:

2. $100,000 in Consequential Damages for:

3. $100,000 in Punitive Damages for:

4. $75,000 in Legal Fees (30% of the total value of the case).

5. A Permanent Injunction prohibiting the Defendant from making any further defamatory statements about the Plaintiff's financial or legal status.

6. A public retraction and apology in the same Discord channel where the defamatory statements were made.


EVIDENCE:

P-001
P-002
P-003
P-004
P-005
P-006


WITNESSES:
1. Naezaratheus (Plaintiff)
2. siti (Artwork creator)


REPRESENTATION:


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 8th day of April 2025