Appeal: Accepted DCR 17 - Contempt Appeal [2023] FCR 82

[Dartanboy]

- Client Name: Dartanman

- Counsel Name: Dartanman

- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: I represented the Prosecution along with la_dano_34

- Reason for the Appeal:
According to the Magistrate: "The Commonwealth of Redmont is hereby held in contempt of court."

She proceeded to order the DoJ to charge "the DLA’s representatives for this case" - presumably me and la_dano_34.

This is not right, as if it is the Commonwealth who was charged with contempt of court, why should la_dano_34 and myself be punished?

If she had charged "the DLA's representatives for this case" with Contempt, this would be reasonable, but again, she didn't. "The Commonwealth of Redmont" was held in contempt.

- Additional Information:
Original Case: Lawsuit: In Session - Commonwealth v. .LodgedRock27703 [2023] DCR 17

 

[Matthew100x]

Verdict

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
DCR 17 - Contempt Appeal [2023] FCR 82

I. THE COURT OPINION
1. It is the opinion of this court that when a legal entity presents a case, that entity is assuming the risk of the liability. This is not read to limit individual liability in all cases, however, if an entity is prosecuting a case, it is fair to assume that the entity takes the risks involved with failure to respond. This goes for both the private companies, whom fall under this protection due to the Corporate Law and Shareholders Protection Act, but also to individual government organizations, whom are conducting business on the behalf of the government.

II. DECISION
1. It is ruled in favor of the appellant. The DOJ is hereby ordered to transition to any charges made against the Attorney General and their fellow prosecutor and place them against the DLA. I hereby order any fine to be made against the DLA budget in place of the appellant and that the appellant be reimbursed for any jail time under 20.1(b) of the Judicial Standards Act.

The Federal Court thanks all involved.