Alexander P. Love
Citizen
Construction & Transport Department
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Supporter
Willow Resident
AlexanderLove
attorney
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2021
- Messages
- 733
- Thread Author
- #1
Client Name: steveshat
Counsel Name: Dragon Law Firm
Party Type: Plaintiff
Appeal Reason: The original case has merit, it has standing, and it has a significant legal basis. The case boiled down to whether or not bot issues could be tied to the defendant. In this case, the Judge prematurely dismissed the case, effectively making a ruling on this important legal question before the conclusion of the case. If given time, the plaintiff, represented by Dragon Law, would have carefully laid out how contributory negligence exists in this case even if the bot had issues. Furthermore, we would have highlighted how there were no bot issues that were not the fault of the defendant, as the settings have known limitations the defendant ignored. Furthermore, the defendant forged evidence which was completely unaddressed by the presiding Judge. All in all, the Judge violated my client's right to a fair trial by making a prejudicial decision, and failing to allow us time to properly make our case. This is why several statement periods exist: to allow time for a case to develop. If the plaintiff's case has to be perfect in the beginning, what's the point of holding a trial past filing a complaint?
Furthermore, this decision is an error of law. Contributory negligence is enshrined in civil law statutes and precedent, and the bot issues were also the fault of the defendant as would have been proven to a balance of probabilities, the burden of proof in this case. Essentially, the verdict allowed the defendant to just suck up all the plaintiff's money. Could Discover Bank have a "bot issue" then legally deny everyone withdrawals? No! That would be theft. Why does Keystone Holdings get to get away with stealing lawfully earned money over a supposed technical issue that was the fault of the defendant in the first place? Not only is the verdict unlawful, it is immoral, unfair, and outright repugnant. This ruling should be overturned and the case should either be accepted by the Supreme Court, or remanded back to the Federal Court for retrial under a different Judge who will actually follow due process.
Finally, the Judge broke procedure. There was no valid reason to dismiss under the Court procedures, and no reason was listed in the verdict. The right to a fair trial was violated in a premature ruling that was effectively just a summary judgment in disguise. There is a negligence claim that was fully supported by facts, evidence, and legal claims. The Judge simply wanted to ignore them, toss out procedure, and legislate from the bench. The Supreme Court should not let errors of both law in verdict and blatant disregard for judicial procedure be ignored. I therefore ask the Supreme Court to grant this appeal. Thank you.
Additional Information: I motion for the recusal of Justice RelaxedGV given his role in the original Federal Court case. The plaintiff thanks the Supreme Court for its time and consideration in reviewing this appeal request.
Counsel Name: Dragon Law Firm
Party Type: Plaintiff
Appeal Reason: The original case has merit, it has standing, and it has a significant legal basis. The case boiled down to whether or not bot issues could be tied to the defendant. In this case, the Judge prematurely dismissed the case, effectively making a ruling on this important legal question before the conclusion of the case. If given time, the plaintiff, represented by Dragon Law, would have carefully laid out how contributory negligence exists in this case even if the bot had issues. Furthermore, we would have highlighted how there were no bot issues that were not the fault of the defendant, as the settings have known limitations the defendant ignored. Furthermore, the defendant forged evidence which was completely unaddressed by the presiding Judge. All in all, the Judge violated my client's right to a fair trial by making a prejudicial decision, and failing to allow us time to properly make our case. This is why several statement periods exist: to allow time for a case to develop. If the plaintiff's case has to be perfect in the beginning, what's the point of holding a trial past filing a complaint?
Furthermore, this decision is an error of law. Contributory negligence is enshrined in civil law statutes and precedent, and the bot issues were also the fault of the defendant as would have been proven to a balance of probabilities, the burden of proof in this case. Essentially, the verdict allowed the defendant to just suck up all the plaintiff's money. Could Discover Bank have a "bot issue" then legally deny everyone withdrawals? No! That would be theft. Why does Keystone Holdings get to get away with stealing lawfully earned money over a supposed technical issue that was the fault of the defendant in the first place? Not only is the verdict unlawful, it is immoral, unfair, and outright repugnant. This ruling should be overturned and the case should either be accepted by the Supreme Court, or remanded back to the Federal Court for retrial under a different Judge who will actually follow due process.
Finally, the Judge broke procedure. There was no valid reason to dismiss under the Court procedures, and no reason was listed in the verdict. The right to a fair trial was violated in a premature ruling that was effectively just a summary judgment in disguise. There is a negligence claim that was fully supported by facts, evidence, and legal claims. The Judge simply wanted to ignore them, toss out procedure, and legislate from the bench. The Supreme Court should not let errors of both law in verdict and blatant disregard for judicial procedure be ignored. I therefore ask the Supreme Court to grant this appeal. Thank you.
Additional Information: I motion for the recusal of Justice RelaxedGV given his role in the original Federal Court case. The plaintiff thanks the Supreme Court for its time and consideration in reviewing this appeal request.
