Search results

  1. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Dismissed Admin23 v. The Exchange [2022] SCR 17

    The Supreme Court has voted to dismiss this case. The Supreme Court will not tolerate people who file cases and then proceed to make light of the Courts time and resources. The Supreme Court finds Admin23 guilty of one count of frivolous court case. I hereby order the Department of Justice to...
  2. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Commonwealth of Redmont v. Milqy [2022] SCR 16

    The defendant may now provide their opening statement within the next 48 hours (October 4th at 4:55 PM EST).
  3. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Commonwealth of Redmont v. Trentrick_Lamar [2022] SCR 14

    The motion to reconsider to rejected. The Supreme Court has already made it's decision and will not be changing it. As the Court stated in the previous denial of Zab, Zab, as the owner previously, has no authority or legal integrity within this current dealings within The Exchange. These are two...
  4. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Dismissed Admin23 v. The Exchange [2022] SCR 17

    The_Donuticus, you are found in direct contempt of this Court. Both parties were warned to avoid breaching Court procedure back in the previous objection. The statement will be struck from the record. I hereby order the DOJ to fine The_Donuticus $500 for first offense contempt of court. Do not...
  5. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Commonwealth of Redmont v. Trentrick_Lamar [2022] SCR 14

    The Supreme Court will not be summoning any of the witnesses. While LordBen2466, Elaina Thomas, black_ven0m, and Zab may indeed have insight into Trentrick_Lamar's personal life, the Supreme Court only has jurisdiction within the Commonwealth. While we understand that we all have personal lives...
  6. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Commonwealth of Redmont v. Trentrick_Lamar [2022] SCR 14

    Prior to issuing a summons, what relation does each witness have to this case?
  7. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Corporate Security Union v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] SCR 15

    WackJap, you are held in direct contempt of this Court. I order the Department of Justice to fine WackJap $500 for his first offense. Do not speak in this case again unless summoned.
  8. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Corporate Security Union v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] SCR 15

    All screenshots which the Commonwealth has provided the court shall be struck from the record. This is new evidence and does not contribute in reference to this case. The Supreme Court will now be in recess while the Justices break to discuss and write the decision.
  9. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Dismissed Admin23 v. The Exchange [2022] SCR 17

    Objection sustained. It is not proper to provide a rebuttal to a motion to dismiss without approval from who is presiding. This is both parties warning. Future breach of procedure may result in contempt of court charges against either party. The motion to dismiss is rejected The plaintiff has...
  10. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Yeet_Boy v. NotGamerrr [2022] FCR 73

    This case will be moved to the Federal Court docket as the Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction over this case.
  11. JoeGamer

    Appeal: Denied FCR 67 - Perjury Charges - Appeal Request

    Justice Nacholebraa has recused himself from this given that he is the one appealing. The Supreme Court has decided to wait to answer this appeal pending [2022] SCR 17 Admin23 v. The Exchange.
  12. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Commonwealth of Redmont v. Milqy [2022] SCR 16

    The motion to dismiss is rejected as it does not state anything frivolous and acts more as a defense. The Commonwealth has 48 hours to provide an opening statement (September 29 at 3:45).
  13. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Commonwealth of Redmont v. Trentrick_Lamar [2022] SCR 14

    The Court now calls for both parties to submit a list of witnesses and/or expert testimonies if any. Both parties have until September 27th at 11:05 PM Eastern Standard Time (24 hours).
  14. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned JoeGamer v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] DCR 44

    In response to the Improper Evidence objection: Supreme Court precedent is not new evidence. As lower courts are bound by the precedent of the Supreme Court (stare decisis), it is not evidence but a recognition of what the Court has already ruled. Furthermore, evidence is not in the form of Act...
  15. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned JoeGamer v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] DCR 44

    Your honor, may I respond to the objections?
  16. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned JoeGamer v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] DCR 44

    Closing Statement Your honor and opposing council As we proceed to conclude this case, instead of repeating all the arguments I stated in my opening statement, I wish to address the claims made by the Commonwealth, including the unconstitutionality of the Criminal Jurisdiction Act. Your...
  17. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Corporate Security Union v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] SCR 15

    Because of Wuutie's resignation as Chief Justice, I will preside over the remainder of this case. The Commonwealth has until 27th of September at 11:40 Eastern Standard Time (48 hours) to provide a closing statement.
  18. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Adjourned Commonwealth of Redmont v. Milqy [2022] SCR 16

    In my capacity as Acting Chief Justice, I will be presiding over the remainder of this case. The Commonwealth may provide a rebuttal to the motion within the next 48 hours (September 27 at 12:15 PM Eastern Standard Time). Furthermore, for the remainder of this case, if a motion is presented to...
  19. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Dismissed Admin23 v. The Exchange [2022] SCR 17

    Mr. Admin23, for the sake of neatness in the Supreme Court, I request that you downsize your screenshots. They are absurdly large and unprofessional. This could be done with Imgur, Google Docs, or simply downsizing them in the original post.
  20. JoeGamer

    Lawsuit: Dismissed Admin23 v. The Exchange [2022] SCR 17

    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT WRIT OF SUMMONS The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of the Admin23 v. The Exchange. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff. I'd also like to...
Back
Top