Unseatedduke1
Redmont School of Law
Construction & Transport Department
Supporter
Popular in the Polls
Unseatedduke1
Constructor
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2024
- Messages
- 774
- Thread Author
- #1
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
CIVIL ACTION
Bardiya_King (Represented by Dragon Law)
Plaintiff
v.
The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
On 2/3/24 at 3:59 PM EST, the Plaintiff was notified of their termination from the (Department of Commerce) DOC by Secretary CzarKovalev. The reason provided for the termination was cited as “Gross Negligence” without any accompanying details. Notably, this termination occurred subsequent to the Plaintiff's legal engagement of the "Dragon Law Firm" as a retainer law firm for the DOC. The Plaintiff contends that the termination, initiated under Secretary CzarKovalev's tenure, lacked proper justification and was executed without an adequate explanation of the alleged negligence. This dismissal is believed to be part of a series of politically motivated actions by the Defendant, who has similarly terminated other employees without sufficient cause. The Plaintiff seeks redress for the unjust termination, asserting that it is indicative of a pattern of arbitrary dismissals orchestrated by the Defendant, negatively impacting not only the Plaintiff but also other employees within the organization.
I. PARTIES
1. Bardiya_King
2. CzarKovalev (DOC Secretary)
3. DOC (Department of Commerce)
II. FACTS
1. On 02/03/2024, at 12:54 AM EST, Bardiya_King entered into a contractual agreement with Dragon Law, officially retaining the firm as legal counsel for the DOC.
2. On 02/03/2024, CzarKovalev assumed the position of DOC Secretary.
3. Subsequent to CzarKovalev's appointment, on 02/03/2024, Bardiya_King was terminated from their position within the DOC. The termination was attributed to "Gross Negligence" and occurred on the same day CzarKovalev assumed the role of DOC Secretary. The dismissal came without providing specific details regarding the alleged negligence, raising concerns about the legitimacy and fairness of the termination. This action is perceived to be part of a broader trend of politically motivated firings orchestrated by the Defendant, as evidenced by similar dismissals of other employees within the organization.
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Plaintiff asserts that the termination was a blatant political maneuver orchestrated by the Defendant. Within approximately 15 minutes of assuming the position, the Defendant removed the Plaintiff, providing a generic reason for termination. This action is deemed a clear violation of the Commercial Standards Act, Section 13 - Employee Protections, specifically (1) Unfair dismissal, which encompasses the unjust termination of an employee, leaving a position vacant without reason only to be immediately filled.
2. The Plaintiff experienced an abrupt severance from employment, devoid of prior notification or any indication of gross negligence within the DOC. This sudden termination inflicted severe emotional distress and profound anxiety upon the Plaintiff, who had consistently demonstrated dedication and commitment to their responsibilities within the DOC.
3. The Plaintiff continues to contend with ongoing anxiety and confusion from the lack of clarity regarding the reasons for termination from the DOC. The absence of transparent communication and a coherent justification exacerbates the Plaintiff's distress, leaving them in a state of uncertainty and disarray concerning their professional standing and future prospects within the government. This lingering uncertainty adds an additional layer of emotional and professional turmoil for the Plaintiff, who seeks resolution and clarity regarding the circumstances surrounding their dismissal.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
1. Compensatory Damages: $45,000: The Plaintiff seeks $45,000 from the Department of Commerce (DOC) as compensatory damages. This amount is warranted to address the financial repercussions resulting from the unwarranted termination. It encompasses the loss of income suffered by the Plaintiff due to their abrupt dismissal from a governmental position, highlighting the economic hardships incurred. This sum includes the loss of in-game wages, future project wages, as well as potential investment opportunities tied to income.
2. Punitive Damages: $20,000: In response to the politically motivated terminations orchestrated by the DOC, the Plaintiff requests $20,000 from the department as punitive damages. This sum is intended to serve as a deterrent and punitive measure against the wrongful actions undertaken by governmental entities. It reflects the severity of the injustice endured by the Plaintiff due to political motivations in their termination.
3. Consequential Damages: $30,000: The Plaintiff seeks $30,000 from the DOC as consequential damages. This amount is justified to address the emotional humiliation and severe anxiety inflicted upon the Plaintiff as a direct consequence of the unjust termination. It accounts for the distress and confusion experienced by the Plaintiff, stemming from the lack of clarity surrounding the grounds for termination, as detailed in the earlier sections of this complaint.
4. Legal Fees: 20% of the awarded amount: The Plaintiff seeks reimbursement for legal fees incurred during the pursuit of justice in this matter.
Witnesses:
AlexanderLove
Khan of Cockroaches
Steveshat
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 15th day of February 2024
Evidence attached: