Lawsuit: In Session Dearev v. Plura72 and Alexandrian News [2025] DCR 14

D

dearev

Citizen
dearev
dearev
Attorney
Joined
Jan 3, 2025
Messages
2

Case Filing


IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Dearev
Plaintiff

v.

Plura72 (Defendant 1)
Alexandria News (Defendant 2)

Defendants

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendants as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

On February 3, 2025, the Defendant (1) published an article through their news channel, Alexandria News, which contained various symbols (attached below). This article was posted in the #news channel of the DC Discord server. A few minutes later, the Defendant sent a follow-up message.

In this second message, the Defendant stated:
"So, In these last days, we whered posting weird news, but after this one dearev (chief of journalism) posted recently, we are firing him, And also, DONT TRUST THIS SCAMMER"

This statement is incorrect due to several reasons:

During my time working at Alexandria News, I did not hold the position of Chief of Journalism. Instead, I served as their legal advisor.
I did not, nor do I have the ability to, publish articles, as I was never granted access to the relevant webhook or channel.
The Defendants referred to me as a "scammer." The term "scammer" is defined as "a person who commits fraud or participates in a dishonest scheme." I have never engaged in fraudulent activities or participated in any dishonest schemes.
Furthermore, the Defendants’ false accusations have caused me significant emotional distress and may have adversely affected my professional reputation, potentially resulting in the loss of clients for my business.
Click to expand...

I. PARTIES
i. Plura72 - Defendant 1
ii. Alexandria News - Defendant 2
iii. Dearev - Plaintiff

II. FACTS

On February 3, 2025, the Defendants published an article through their news channel, Alexandria News, which contained various symbols.
The Defendants made a follow-up article defaming me and causing emotional distress.
The Defendants published the false statements in a publicly accessible channel (#news), making the statements visible to various users.
Due to the Defendants’ statement labeling the Plaintiff as a “scammer,” the Plaintiff has faced reputational harm, including but not limited to loss of credibility, potential clients, and professional standing.
The phrasing of the Defendants’ statement (“DONT TRUST THIS SCAMMER”) suggests an intentional effort to damage the Plaintiff’s credibility.
The Defendants did not contact the Plaintiff before making these allegations publicly, denying the Plaintiff an opportunity to clarify or refute the claims in a professional setting.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

(i) Defamation - The Defendants intentionally, without review, publicly made false defamatory accusations against the Plaintiff.
(ii) Negligence - The Defendants neglected to consider any further damage that publicly publishing the article could cause.
(iii) Misinformation - The Defendants published untrue information on the #news channel, misinforming others.
  1. The Defendants, operating as a news organization, had a duty to ensure the accuracy of their statements before publication. By failing to verify the claims against the Plaintiff and publishing unverified statements in a public setting, they breached this duty, causing reputational and emotional harm to the Plaintiff.

(iv) Emotional Damages - The Defendants’ actions furthermore caused emotional damage to the Plaintiff.


IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendants:

i. A public apology from Alexandria News.
ii. $10,000 in reparations.

By making this submission, I agree that I understand the penalties of lying in court and that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: This 3rd day of February 2025

 

Attachments

  • P-0001.png
    P-0001.png
    46.1 KB · Views: 33
  • P-0002.png
    P-0002.png
    67.1 KB · Views: 36
Last edited:

Writ of Summons


@Plura72 is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of dearev v plura72 and Alexandrian News [2025] DCR 14

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.

 
Present, your honor. Dragon Law representing.
 
Alexander P. Love said:
Right, I definitely go representing people who don’t want my representation, with my 35 other cases.

View attachment 51566
Click to expand...
Alexanderlove this is a warning for your snark comment. You should know as much as anyone with your 35 cases that it is common practice to require proof of representation.

You also have 72 hours to provide your answer to complaint
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top