Lawsuit: Adjourned Atreides Clients (Class Action Group) v. Atreides [2024] FCR 87

Status
Not open for further replies.
itsBlazeX

itsBlazeX

Citizen
Homeland Security Department
Construction & Transport Department
Change Maker Popular in the Polls Statesman
itsBlazeX
itsBlazeX
Recruit
Joined
Jul 5, 2023
Messages
283
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Atreides Clients (Class Action Group)
Plaintiff

V.

Atreides
Defendant


COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
About 2 weeks ago, the CEO of Atreides, antilethal, went missing. As a result of this, every Atreides client was unable to do anything with their money until now. The only way clients were able to get their money was by the government stepping in to right the ship. No matter what excuse antilethal has for being gone, antilethal has many employees at Atreides, however, none of them were given the power to complete transactions. Many things could have been done differently to prevent this, and these clients deserve compensation.

I. PARTIES
1. csimiami14 (Plaintiff)
2. Arctic_fox10 (Plaintiff)
3. bibsfi4a (Plaintiff)
4. Justa_Dumpling (Plaintiff)
5. NotPhunky (Plaintiff)
6. Dartanman (Plaintiff)
7. Mask3D_WOLF (Plaintiff)
8. Bombaz2005 (Plaintiff)
9. got_the_goat (Plaintiff)
10. MegaMinerM (Plaintiff)
11. Nexalin (Plaintiff)
12. Jimmyboy2009915 (Plaintiff)
13. Atreides (Defendant)

II. FACTS
1. antilethal was last heard from over 2 weeks ago.
2. Over the past 2 weeks, no client has been able to deposit or withdraw money from Atreides.
3. Atreides clients have had their money frozen in the bank for over 2 weeks.
4. No Atreides employees are able to complete transactions other than antilethal.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. According to the Commercial Standards Act, Atreides Bank is classified as a commercial bank. However, a commercial bank must return their clients deposits to them when requested by the client. Atreides has failed to uphold that responsibility, and has left their clients without access to their own money for weeks.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
1. The Court to order the Department of Commerce to strip Atreides of its Financial Institution status.
2. $15,000 in punitive damages to be paid to each Plaintiff in this case.
3. $10,000 for The Loss of Enjoyment in Redmont to be paid to each Plaintiff in this case.
4. 30% of total case value in legal fees

V. MOTION TO AMEND
As more people join this lawsuit, I request permission to to amend the list of Plaintiffs and the Prayer for Relief as more people continue to join this lawsuit.


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 June 2024
 
Last edited:
Seal_Judiciary.png


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

@Lethal are required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Atreides Clients (Class Action Group) v. Atreides. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures , including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​
 
@Lethal is hereby held in Contempt, court is in recess pending verdict.
 

Verdict


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT

Atreides Clients (Class Action Group) v. Atreides [2024] FCR 87

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The plaintiffs allege that due to the disappearance of Atreides' CEO, antilethal, they were unable to access their funds held by Atreides Bank for over two weeks.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. Atreides' defense has not formally responded to the allegations or presented a defense in this matter.

III. THE COURT OPINION

Verdict


  1. This default ruling is based on the information presented by the parties and matters commonly known to the public.
  2. As a commercial bank, Atreides has a duty to allow its depositors to withdraw funds within a reasonable timeframe. Failure by Atreides to provide funds upon depositor request constitutes grounds for damages.
  3. The class action suit failed to substantiate the existence of any account holders or provide proof of attempts to contact the bank for fund retrieval. This serves as a reminder that all pertinent evidence must be included in the initial complaint. While discovery can introduce NEW evidence, in this default judgment, the court must base its decision solely on the evidence presented.

IV. DECISION
In the matter of FCR 87, I rule in favor of the Plaintiff with a modified prayer for relief.
  1. I hereby order the Department of Commerce to strip Atreides of its Financial Institution status.
  2. Legal Fees of $1,000 awarded to itsBlazeX.
  3. I do not grant any additional prayers for relief due to the lack of sufficient evidence regarding the existence of accounts.

The Federal Court thanks all involved.

 
Last edited:
Due to this SCR Appeal, I will be reopening this case. @itsBlazeX, you have 24 hours to present any additional evidence you wish to be considered before this court makes a verdict. Please keep this evidence neat; I recommend using the Spoiler feature for organization. I will be striking my previous verdict from the record to allow for a new one after the evidence is submitted.
 
NotPhunky
1718738857287.png


Nexalin
1718738945710.png

1718738961234.png


JustaDumpling
1718738995553.png

csimiami14
1718739021012.png

bibsfi4a (AryaBroz)
1718739179285.png

Arctic_fox10
1718739230721.png

got_the_goat
1718739331995.png


MegaMinerM
1718739354935.png
 
Your honor, not all clients have submitted proof of account ownership yet. I would like to remind the Court I reserve the right to provide additional evidence until 6/19/2024 12:10 PM EST.
 
Dartanman
1718739736481.png
 
Your honor, the plaintiff wishes to submit the following as precedent:

Lawsuit: Adjourned - ItsBlazeX v. Atreides [2024] FCR 84

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT CIVIL ACTION ItsBlazeX (Prestige Law Firm representing) Plaintiff V. Atreides Defendant COMPLAINT The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: On May 29th, 2024, ItsBlazeX attempted to withdraw money from their Atreides bank...
www.democracycraft.net www.democracycraft.net
 
Bombaz2005
1718741204448.png
 
@itsBlazeX, I ask that you also provide proof that you represent everyone listed in the original complaint.
 
Unseatedduke1 said:
@itsBlazeX, I ask that you also provide proof that you represent everyone listed in the original complaint.
Click to expand...
Your honor, I request a 48 hour extension to allow my clients ample time to respond.
 
Granted. Deadline for everything is 6/21 12:10PM EST.
 
PROOF OF REPRESENTATION
NotPhunky
1718927184347.png


Nexalin
1718927207500.png


Justa_Dumpling
1718927225136.png


csimiami14
1718927244602.png


Mask3D_WOLF
1718927281056.png


Dartanman
1718927321732.png


Bombaz2005
1718927345134.png


got_the_goat
1718927378096.png


MegaMinerM
1718927395132.png
 
Your honor, I have provided a more organized collection of the evidence.

NotPhunky
1718927543965.png

1718927551612.png


Nexalin
1718927583918.png

1718927620618.png

1718927631217.png


Justa_Dumpling
1718927732676.png

1718927752878.png


csimiami14
1718927783004.png

1718927793384.png


bibsfi4a (AryaBroz)
1718927823236.png

1718927867251.png


Arctic_Fox10
1718927895312.png

1718927934655.png


Dartanman
1718928039703.png

1718928052616.png


Bombaz2005
1718928077309.png

1718928088371.png


got_the_goat
1718928148258.png

1718928158006.png
 

Attachments

  • 1718927567447.png
    1718927567447.png
    18.9 KB · Views: 42
Is this everything?
 
MegaMinerM
1718928228739.png

1718928250380.png
 
Mask3D_WOLF
1718928370760.png

1718928388107.png
 

Verdict


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT

Atreides Clients (Class Action Group) v. Atreides [2024] FCR 87

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The plaintiffs allege that due to the disappearance of Atreides' CEO, antilethal, they were unable to access their funds held by Atreides Bank for over two weeks.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. Atreides' defense has not formally responded to the allegations or presented a defense in this matter.

III. THE COURT OPINION

  1. This default ruling is based on the information presented by the parties and matters commonly known to the public.

  2. As a commercial bank, Atreides has a duty to allow its depositors to withdraw funds within a reasonable timeframe. Failure by Atreides to provide funds upon depositor request constitutes grounds for damages.

  3. The class action provided proof of account holders, allowing the court to award damages to each individual who struggled to access their funds. While two weeks is a significant period to be without access to money, the court must determine, “What constitutes outrageous conduct in this case?” The court has determined that the CEO's gross negligence and lack of contingency planning for their absence are the primary issues. The CEO's failure to have a plan, notify depositors of their absence, and ensure timely fund withdrawals constitutes clearly outrageous conduct.

  4. While the court may never know why the CEO left, it is evident that the absence was not intended to harm depositors. Consequently, the punitive damages awarded will be less than requested.

  5. Regarding compensation for loss of enjoyment, the court recognizes that loss of enjoyment is defined as “situations in which an injured party loses their ability to engage in certain activities in the way that the injured party did before the harm. Loss of enjoyment in Redmont damages may be proven by witness testimony, reasonable person tests, or any other mechanism the presiding Judge considers persuasive.” Although a full trial is ideal for determining such damages, applying the Reasonable Person standard legal test, the court concludes that a reasonable person would recognize that financial stability and access to one's funds are crucial for daily life and enjoyment.

IV. DECISION
In the matter of FCR 87, I rule in favor of the Plaintiff with a modified prayer for relief.
  1. I hereby order the Department of Commerce to strip Atreides of its Financial Institution status.
  2. $10,000 to be paid to each the following Plaintiffs for the outrageous conduct of the bank: NotPhunky, Nexalin, Justa_Dumpling, csimiami14, bibsfi4a, Arctic_Fox10, Dartanman, Bombaz2005, Mask3D_WOLF and got_the_goat.
  3. An additional $5,000 to be paid to each of the Plaintiffs listed above for their loss of enjoyment.
  4. $40,000 to be paid in legal fees to itsBlazeX.

The Federal Court thanks all involved.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top