Appeal: Denied [2024] <FCR 28> - Appeal Request

[Avaneesh2008]

- Client Name: Mask3d_Wolf

- Counsel Name: Avaneesh2008 (Dragon Law)

- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Plaintiff

- Reason for the Appeal: When the Federal Court ruled in favor of the defendant, the ruled that because Magistrates are governed by the Judicial Standards Act (JSA), they are not governed by the Commercial Standards Act (CSA). However, the JSA never outlined that magistrates are not to be governed by other pieces of legislation. While the Federal Court is right that Magistrates are regulated by the JSA, they fail to consider that a person can be regulated by more than one piece of legislation. The CSA applies to all people regardless of their political status or job as there is no mention of restrictions anywhere in the act. In addition, the court ruled that the Supreme Court was able to fire Mask3d_Wolf with the JSA in place at that time, however, the plaintiff's argument was that the CSA prohibits unjust termination, not that the JSA did not allow Mask3d_wolf to be fired. Both of these reasonings show holes in the verdict given by the Federal Court and the plaintiff wishes to ask the Supreme Court to look over this case.

- Additional Information: The plaintiff was also denied $50,000 in unpaid salary from his job as a magistrate and we hope to be awarded this amount so the plaintiff can be paid for the work they have done as a Magistrate.

 

[RelaxedGV]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
The Supreme Court has decided to reject the appeal of FCR 28.

The Supreme Court has decided to do this for the following reasons:

1. To quickly get this out of the way, no evidence was provided that the payments were filed in the correct channel within the Judiciary Discord.
2. Now for the real issue of the Appeal. We have to look at what makes an employee. The Oxford Dictionary define an Employee as a "a person who is paid to work for somebody". Now this is where it differs, while a Magistrate serves at the pleasure of the Supreme Court, they are not being paid to work for the Supreme Court.

Going beyond, I affirm with the original verdict that a Magistrate is a public official thus, if someone is removed from Congress via the logic of the Appellant, that official would have been fired from their job. This is not how the Government works.
3. No new evidence was provided showing that that case was grossly mismanaged, the original Judge grossly overlooked evidence, had prejudice, etc. This case simply has little merit to be filed for an Appeal. The original facts of the case are simply correct to the Supreme Court's interpretation.

This is a little sidenote, the reason I, RelaxedGV, can unilaterally rule on the case is is given you only need a minimum of two (2) Justice's to rule on cases. Not Appeals. This is in accordance with the Constitution.

The Supreme Court thanks you for the Appeal.​