Lawsuit: Adjourned cheesypig v. ZekeTheKaiser, ManagerHell, GoldBlooded, Department of Construction & Transport, and Town of Oakridge [2021] DCR 36

C

cheesypig

Citizen
1st Anniversary
cheesypig
cheesypig
Joined
Dec 18, 2020
Messages
39
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


cheesypig
Plaintiff

v.

ZekeTheKaiser
ManagerHell
GoldBlooded
Department of Construction & Transport
Town of Oakridge,
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

I. PARTIES
1. cheesypig (Plaintiff, and winner of original auction)
2. ZekeTheKaiser (original plot owner who put plot on sale, and potential witness)
3. ManagerHell (person/renter who received my plot without my consent or authorization)
4. GoldBlooded (person who won ManagerHell's auction)
5. Town of Oakridge (town which this event took place)
6. Department of Construction and Transport(DCT) (department responsible with plot management, including evictions)
7. Heather (mod)
8. Mhad (mod)
9. Tylxr (mod)

II. FACTS
1. On February 11, 2021, ZekeTheKaiser put up an auction for a residential plot (res-006)(coordinates: x = -5675, z = 760) for sale in Oakridge. As ZekeTheKaiser said in the auction, this was for PURCHASING the plot completely.
2. Cheesypig put a bid on it and eventually won the plot for $1,000 on February 14, 2021. Cheesypig visited the plot and soon paid the $1,000 required for the plot to ZekeTheKaiser, which was then transferred to cheesypig. ZekeTheKaiser confirmed to cheesypig, in game, that the plot transfer was successful. Due to the official and legal manner of the auction (being taken place on the DC Bid Discord), and cheesypig paying the $1,000 to ZekeTheKaiser, cheesypig, at this point, legally owns the plot.
3. At some point between February 14, 2021 and March 25, 2021, ManagerHell rented the plot for residential use.
4. On March 25, 2021, ZekeTheKaiser was permanently banned for "Homophobia and hate speech." As per legal procedure, ZekeTheKaiser's plots would eventually be evicted and taken away from him. For unknown reasons, this could've potentially included cheesypig's plot, which would imply that ZekeTheKaiser didn't completely and/or correctly transfer res-006 to cheesypig(which as stated before, is legally cheesypig's property as he paid for it). However, contrary to this theory, unlike with two of ZekeTheKaiser's other plots (forum page links in section V), res-006 was never evicted by the DCT as seen on the forums with the other two.
5. According to ManagerHell, he was "renting [res-006] before and then I just owned it so I thought the owner gave it to me or something." Looking at the evidence above, ZekeTheKaiser never (at least legally speaking) gave ManagerHell the plot. In fact, soon after ZekeTheKaiser was banned, the plot was for unknown reasons or methods, transferred to ManagerHell. Cheesypig never knew about any sort of plot transfer, nor did cheesypig consent or authorize for it to happen. ManagerHell noticed this at or before May 15, 2021. Furthermore, there is zero legal reason for the plot to be transferred from ZekeTheKaiser to ManagerHell by the DCT.
6. On May 15, 2021, ManagerHell put up an auction for res-006 (my plot) on the DC Bid discord channel, which was done without cheesypig's consent or authorization. GoldBlooded put a bid on it and eventually won it on May 17, 2021 for $4,600. The plot was, assumingly, paid for and transferred on or right after the date in which it was won.
7. On June 17, 2021, cheesypig took a visit to his Oakridge plot (res-006) and immediately notice that not only was his house completely demolished but he was unable to break blocks or otherwise edit the plot. The plaintiff assumes that GoldBlooded was responsible for the modifications as GoldBlooded bought ownership from ManagerHell as stated in the previous point.
8. If cheesypig was evicted from the plot, cheesypig was never notified by the Town of Oakridge or the DCT, whether in game or on discord. Furthermore, there is no official forum posts outlining an eviction of cheesypig from his own plot on the DemocracyCraft forums.
9. Immediately after this, cheesypig made a staff ticket on the DC discord, in which Heather, Mhad, and Tylxr responded to it, but they are unable to do much due to separation of staff and state. The mods claimed that they believed it could've been due to inactivity. However, this couldn't be the case because 1) Cheesypig was never inactive for longer than 1 month, 2) The DCT nor the town of Oakridge (The DCT is probably the one who deals with evictions in Oakridge at the time as seen with ZekeTheKaiser's evicted from his rented plot) made any formal eviction post on the forums, nor did they notify cheesypig at all via PMs in-game or on discord, and 3) If cheesypig was actually inactive (evidence says otherwise, but let's say this was the case for the sake of the argument), the other plots that cheesypig owned (such as his Hamilton residence) would've also been evicted, but that never occurred.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Res-006, which is the plaintiff's property, was, with no legal justification, taken away from him.
2. The plaintiff has no idea how his plot was taken away from him. This could've been either: 1) ZekeTheKaiser never correctly transferred the plot to the plaintiff and therefore never effectively game the plaintiff ownership of res-006, and the plot later on somehow got into the hands of ManagerHell, or 2) The DCT and/or the Town of Oakridge extrajudicially evicted the plaintiff from his own plot. Regardless of whatever occurred, point 1 under CLAIMS FOR RELIEF still stands valid.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Depending on which defendant(s) is determined to be at fault by the court, the Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant(s):
1. The plot res-006 to be transferred back to the plaintiff, OR
2. Monetary compensation of $4,600 to be paid from the defendant(s) to the plaintiff.

V: EVIDENCE
The evidence is in the following links and galleries:
1. The picture of the house in question as of February 2021: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/857392309288304661/857399647014486016/unknown.PNG
2. Screenshot of plot now as of July 14, 2021:
https://imgur.com/a/iYK9Xmu
3. Original auction of res-006:
https://imgur.com/a/4GGyp2U
4. ManagerHell’s auction of res-006:
https://imgur.com/a/XrpnJDf
5. ManagerHell’s comments: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachme...7882/Screen_Shot_2021-06-20_at_9.44.57_PM.png
6. Staff ticket link: https://tickettool.xyz/direct?url=h...56387469699710996/transcript-closed-3507.html
7. cheesypig's analytics: Plan | Login (Note that none of the gaps between cheesypig's two sessions are longer than three weeks, let alone a month, which is the minimum time before an eviction can take place).
8. Zeke’s vaulting and eviction:
https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/r-106-immediate-eviction.5914/
https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/th-003-immediate-vault.6981/
9. Zeke’s ban and appeal
https://www.democracycraft.net/logs/history.php?uuid=c55c6e21a0c646abb3349f7aff6e4bc7&from=ban
https://www.democracycraft.net/threads/zekethekaiser-permanent-ban-appeal.4757/

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 14th day of July, 2021
 
district-court-png.12083


IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

The defendants
ZekeTheKaiser, ManagerHell, GoldBlooded and the Attorney General are required to appear before the court in the case of cheesypig v. ZekeTheKaiser, ManagerHell, GoldBlooded, Department of Construction & Transport, and Town of Oakridge. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures.​
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

cheesypig
Plaintiff

v.

ManagerHell (ComradeLuigi representing)
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. At some point between February 14, 2021 and March 25, 2021, ManagerHell rented the plot for residential use.
2. After ZekeTheKaiser was banned, the plot was for unknown reasons or methods, transferred to ManagerHell. According to ManagerHell, he was "renting [res-006] before and then I just owned it so I thought the owner gave it to me or something" (June 18, 2021).
3. Before at least May 15, 2021, according to the Defendant, ManagerHell didn't know Cheesypig had previously owned res-006, nor that cheesypig didn't consent or authorize for the transferal to happen.
4. On May 15, 2021, ManagerHell put up an auction for res-006 on the DC Bid discord channel. GoldBlooded put a bid on it and eventually won it on May 17, 2021 for $4,600. The plot was paid for and transferred on or right after the date on which it was won.

II. DEFENCES
1. The eviction of res-006 and its subsequent transferral to ManagerHell; be it because ZekeTheKaiser's initial transfer to cheesypig wasn't done correctly or because the Town of Oakridge or the DCT wrongly assumed cheesypig's inactivity and did so extrajudicially; happened without the Defendant's consent and didn't involve any illegal activities on the Defendant's part.
2. The subsequent auction of res-006 on the DC Bid discord channel didn't involve any illegal activities either.
3. Therefore, it'd be unreasonable to have the Defendant pay any sort of compensation to the Plaintiff.


By making this submission, I agree and 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 July of 2021

Screenshot_488.png
 
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

MOTION TO DISMISS



Cheesypig

Plaintiff



v.



The Department of Construction and Transportation, Town of Oakridge

Defendant



MOTION TO DISMISS

Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

1. This case is one that has no solid facts, the plaintiff is fishing for someone to blame. The Plaintiff is suing everyone that has any sort of connection and even people that do not. This case is not put together and is pulling people together and attempting to assign blame where it is not due.

2. After speaking with the DCT and staff we found out neither evicted him for his plot

3. The evidence he provides does not specifically indicate the Government


(The words defendand and complaint should be changed in case the motion is to dismiss a counterclaim.)

DATED: This 16th day of July 2021
 
Your Honour,

I would like to ask for more time to reply to this on behalf of my client GoldBlooded, I have personally messaged you for my explanation as to this request, if the court permits I would like 72 hours if possible due to the irl issue I have.
 
Poemhunter said:
Your Honour,

I would like to ask for more time to reply to this on behalf of my client GoldBlooded, I have personally messaged you for my explanation as to this request, if the court permits I would like 72 hours if possible due to the irl issue I have.
Click to expand...
 
Im going to grant the 72 hours extension because this is just a block game and irl issues are more important. Good luck.
 
IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

MOTION TO DISMISS


Cheeseypig
Plaintiff

v.

Goldblooded ( Poemhunter representing )
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS GoldBlooded
Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

That my client Goldblooded, should be dismissed due to him not being a participant in the act of removing the plot from the original owner. Goldblooded had no prior knowledge of the plot history and who should have owned it and when he won the action from manager, he received the plot empty and had made no modification to the plot. Goldblooded cannot be held accountable for the plot loss when he wasn’t a participant in its removal from the plaintiff just an innocent bystander caught up in previous affairs.

DATED: This 20 day of July 2021
 
Does the plaintiff like to respond to the motions to dismiss
 
Yes your honor, I would like to respond to both motions. Here is my first one for the DCT & Town of Oakridge (Represented by SumoMC)

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS

In response to points:
1. "This case is one that has no solid facts, the plaintiff is fishing for someone to blame. The Plaintiff is suing everyone that has any sort of connection and even people that do not. This case is not put together and is pulling people together and attempting to assign blame where it is not due."
The case presented by the plaintiff has been supported by plenty of facts, backed by a plethora of evidence. The plaintiff was unsure of what caused his property to not be in his ownership, but has presented more than enough evidence to prove that no matter what occurred (or for what reason), it was wrong and the plaintiff should have his prayer for relief fulfilled by the District Court of Redmont.
Furthermore, the claims by the defendant's representative that the plaintiff is "fishing for blame" and "suing everyone that has any [or no] connection" can't be further from the truth. The reason the plaintiff added the amount of defendants that he did was because 1) they played a role in this whole situation (whether or not they knew and/or did it for malicious reasons), 2) The plaintiff believes that any potential rulings that come out of this suit shouldn't involve people who aren't defendants. Essentially, the plaintiff believes that it would be wrong to have a non-defendant potentially pay for damages even though they were not named as a defendant. And 3) The plaintiff aims to have the facts come out regarding certain events involving each defendant named (as some of the facts, as stated earlier in point 1, were not 100% clear), and have the courts determine which of the defendants are at fault.

2. "After speaking with the DCT and staff we found out neither evicted him for his plot"
Before we go on to rebut this point, what the lawyer representing the DCT stated is a good example of my third reasoning in point 1. The plaintiff (and the court) now knows that the most likely reasoning for this situation occurring in the first place was ZekeTheKaiser not transferring the plot correctly. Anyways, although this would normally prove that the DCT (and to an extent, the Town of Oakridge) does not deserve blame, this also shows an inconsistency (and arguably negligence on the behalf of the DCT). This is because when the plaintiff first noticed his property as not being his in June, the DCT originally claimed (as seen in evidence #6) that the plot was evicted. However, in light of the suit and evidence, the DCT has changed its position to say that they did not evict.

3. "The evidence he provides does not specifically indicate the Government"
Seeing that the DCT and/or the Town of Oakridge did not evict me from my plot, this would dissolve them of blame in terms of being the direct cause of this problem. However, as stated in point 2 above, there are new questions that must be answered as to why the DCT switched positions on whether I was evicted or not.

The allegations in the motions of dismiss raised by the DCT & Town of Oakridge have been sufficiently countered by the plaintiff. To sum it up, the plaintiff has good reason for suing the number of defendants he did (specifically the DCT and the Town of Oakridge), all the facts that the plaintiff has presented is backed by evidence, and the DCT should still be held accountable due to inconsistent statements made by them regarding the plaintiff's evictions (this shows a lack of care and negligence on the DCT's side). For these reasons, we ask the judge to not grant the motion for dismissal and for the case to continue.
 
Now onto the motion to dismiss for GoldBlooded (Represented by Poemhunter)

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS

In response to points:
1. That my client Goldblooded, should be dismissed due to him not being a participant in the act of removing the plot from the original owner. Goldblooded had no prior knowledge of the plot history and who should have owned it and when he won the action from manager, he received the plot empty and had made no modification to the plot. Goldblooded cannot be held accountable for the plot loss when he wasn’t a participant in its removal from the plaintiff just an innocent bystander caught up in previous affairs.

While the plaintiff doesn't believe that Goldblooded acted in bad intent or deserves blame, as stated in the response to motion to dismiss for the DCT & Town of Oakridge, the plaintiff believes that it is in the best interest of this case and for all parties involved to keep Goldblooded as a defendant. This is because 1) Goldblooded is the current property owner, and any rulings for this case will most likely involve him, and 2) A potential out of court settlement may arise, and it would be inappropriate to dismiss this case prematurely.
For this reason, the plaintiff asks the judge to not grant the motion for dismissal and for the case to continue.
 
Im going to overrule the Attornery Generals motion to dismiss because the DCT were indeed involved in this case and so they will have to defend them with evidence. The court also want the evictions by the DCT shown in court because if they first said they evicted him, then there needs to be a record of this. Also the DCT handles the plots and the main question is: How did ManagerHell get the plot on his name instead the Plaintiff? Because of these reasons I'm going to overrule the motion. The court also asks that the Attorney General gets his facts straight.
Furthermore the fact that the owner now is Goldblooded makes him only a party interested in this case. The court can't condemn a defendant when he didn't broke any rules or laws. Goldblooded is hereby dismissed of this lawsuit.

We can proceed to the opening statements of the defendants.
 
Your Honor,

As I was appointed to Attorney General yesterday I am requesting a 72 hour extension for both the DCT and Town of Oakridge portion of the suit to be able to review and assign prosecutors to the case.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

cheesypig
Plaintiff

v.

Department of Construction and Transportation
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS
Your honor, as Secretary of the DCT I am representing myself.

Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:
It is the belief of the DCT that this case is frivolous in regards to our involvement.

1. The DCT never claimed that they evicted the prosecution's plot.

This is the evidence that the prosecution brings against the defendant. The prosecution cites a server support ticket, not a DCT ticket. As such, Heather and Mhadsher101 are acting as staff members when they gave the possibility that the prosecution's plot may have been reported by a Building Inspector and evicted. It was offered as a possible reason why the plot was lost. It was not a fact said by the DCT, like the prosecution alleges. Mhadsher101 used the terminology "highly likely," and Heather used "most likely," referring to a BI report for inactivity against the prosecution. The two staff members did not claim with any certainty that the prosecution lost the plot due to BI eviction. These two individuals were simply trying to help the ticket maker, cheesypig, with possible reasons for how he lost his plot, as that is the responsibly of staff: to be helpful. Mhadsher101 and Heather did not know the full situation and were just expressing a possibility for why the plot was lost, in an attempt to be helpful staff members.

Staff and the government are separate entities, an assertion made by a staff member in a server support ticket is not to be taken as fact said by a government department.

To reiterate, the evidence against the DCT actually took place in a server support ticket, and nobody in that server support ticket made the clear claim that cheesypig certainly lost his plot due to a Building Inspector report.

As such, there is no eviction report to show as the DCT never claimed the plot was evicted. The prosecution indeed provides evidence that cheesypig unfairly does not have his plot, but there is no evidence that the DCT is responsible, nor that we provided false claims.

The prosecution makes it clear in their response to the motion of dismissal that the DCT would "not deserve blame," if not for the claim that the plot was lost to an eviction report. As the defendant has explained, the DCT never claimed this, it was no more than a suggestion offered up by two staff members answering a server support ticket.

While the defendant wishes for the prosecution to get the compensation it deserves by the party responsible, it must be acknowledged that the defense in question was not involved in the eviction of the plot or misleading the prosecution with a false claim. While the DCT does write the reports for plots to be evicted, no such report was ever made. Staff is the entity that actually evicts people, the DCT themselves do not remove a player's ownership over a plot. As such, the DCT could not have evicted the plot. Without a report, the DCT cannot be responsible for the plot's eviction.

All that can be deduced by the defendant is that the DCT were not involved as there was no report for the prosecution's plot. Only staff has the commands that could deduce what really happened, such as which commands were typed in the area of the plot. There is no longer any evidence that proves the involvement of the defendant, and as such the defendant should be dismissed from this case.

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 is the 26th day of July 2021
 
First of all: is the Attorney General now representing the DCT further in the case?
Finally does the Plaintiff like to respond on this motion?
 
Your honor,
As both the attorney general and I worked originally representing the plaintiffs in this case, while we both worked at apex law firm, which originally represented the plaintiff, we both have a conflict of interest in this case. There are currently no other prosecutors in the office of the attorney general, and therefore we are unable to represent the town of oakridge and the DCT in this case. Secretary Mhadsher will be representing the DCT, while a representative for Oakridge is still being selected.
 
If the Plaintiff doesnt have an answer in the coming 24 hours, I will make a decision on the motion without his response.
 
Yes, I would like to address the motion to dismiss.

The DCT does make a very good point as to why they should be dismissed (and I definitely could've and should've made a DCT ticket), I feel that whether or not their motion is seen to be sufficient enough for them to be dismissed, I believe that calling it frivolous is incorrect.
 
Since the Plaintiff accepts the motion to dismiss for the DCT, I'm granting the motion to dismiss.
 
Does any party have any witnesses to call?
 
No, I don't have any witnesses to call. I believe the evidence speaks for itself.
 
Then we can move on to the closing statements,
The Plaintiff may proceed with his closing statement.
 
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

cheesypig
Plaintiff

v.

ManagerHell (ComradeLuigi representing)
Defendant

Your honor,
As was made clear during this case, no evidence of wrongdoing by my defendant ManagerHell was presented, as he was not responsible for the plot's eviction. Therefore, it's unreasonable to expect him to provide any monetary compensation for what most likely was a mistake made by the staff. Hopefully, the judge will understand this and rule accordingly.
 
If the Plaintiff doesn't respond in the next 24 hours, we will move on without it.
 
We will move on without it, The court is in recess now.
 
Your honor, I apologize for the delay in my closing statement. I have been busy with IRL commitments and would now wish to submit my closing statement.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

cheesypig
Plaintiff

v.

ZekeTheKaiser and ManagerHell (ComradeLuigi representing)
Defendant

Your honor,
At the end of the day, the plaintiff is not trying to look for someone to blame or scapegoat, but rather simply wants his property back and/or wants compensation for the monetary worth of the property plus extra damages. As a reminder to this court, Mhadster, the Secretary of the DCT, said in his motion to dismiss, "the prosecution indeed provides evidence that cheesypig unfairly does not have his plot...", and "...[The DCT] wishes for the prosecution to get the compensation it deserves...". Furthermore, ZekeTheKaiser, one of the individuals who was named as a defendant in this lawsuit, never appeared before this court. ZekeTheKaiser, to be specific, was the one who originally sold the plot to the plaintiff. As we now know that the DCT or the Town of Oakridge did not confiscate the plaintiff's plot, we can now infer that most likely ZekeTheKaiser neglected his legal obligation to correctly transfer the plot to cheesypig. Lastly, ManagerHell never really specified or explained how he received the plaintiff's plot in the first place, which seems suspicious considering that there is no legal ruling that transfers plots to tenants in the case of a landlord losing his own property for whatever reason.
Considering all of these factors, I hope the Judge takes this closing statement to heart and gives out a just ruling which satisfied all parties involved.
 

Verdict


IN THE COURT OF COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT

Case No. 07-2021-15

1. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
a) Cheesypig put a bid on the DC Bid discord and won it eventually. The plot was succesfully transferred to the Plaintiff.
b) He rented the plot to ManagerHell and suddenly he lost the plot to ManagerHell. Later on ManagerHell decided to sell the plot to another person.
c) He never got a mention from the DCT he would get evicted.

2. DEFENDANTS POSITION
a) The DCT got dismissed from this case earlier
b) ZekeTheKaiser was not part of this case because of a ban. But I can conclude that he is dismissed of the case because he never did something wrong following the laws in this lawsuit.
c) Town Of Oakridge had no part in the potential crime commited
d) ManagerHell was not responsible for the eviction as there was no evidence shown otherwise, so he is not accountable for any monetary compensation.
e) Goldblooded got dismissed from this case earlier

3. THE COURTS OPINION
There are more options on what actually happened in this case:
a) It was a staff error and so it can't be dealt with in the Court.
b) The Plaintiff bought a rented building and it is likely that the rental time could have expired through the time.
So there is a strong possibilty the rent expired. Neither is there enough evidence that shows the DCT or any of the defendants unlawfully transferred the plot, so there is not enough evidence to condemn any of the defendants beyond a reasonable doubt.

4. DECISION

The court adjourns hereby the case in favour of the Defendants.

The Court would like to note as well that this can't be set as a precedent in future cases. We do not investigate cases or crimes in this Court. So the Court requests for research and a well set-up case against defendants and not putting everyone that had a part in a story but not the crime.

Furthermore the Court thanks each party for their time and effort put in this difficult case.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top