Lawsuit: Dismissed Dunder Mifflin DC v. The Commonwealth [2022] DCR 5

[Westray]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Dunder Mifflin DC
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

The Defendant, the Commonwealth of Redmont, has continuously failed to provide the appropriate budget transparency on a monthly basis as per outlined in the Appropriations Process Act. Not only has the last budget transcript been posted in October, but also the posting of budgets have been inconsistent and not in line with the law since March of 2021. This disregard for the law and lack of transparency is nothing short of repugnant and has been a deterrent to the journalistic industry.

Throughout this inconsistency the public and the press have continuously missed crucial updates on government spending. This has caused a detriment on the company of Dunder Mifflin DC as a paper supplying business, given that news companies have been unable to produce as much news articles and therefore have used less paper. This has impacted the sales of Dunder Mifflin DC, and resulted in less players seeking to buy paper, to which several customers can testify to. In addition to this, Dunder Mifflin DC's CEO, Westray, has been unable to post as many office-related memes based on the budget spending, given this lack of transparency. This clear disregard for the law must be addressed and the harm done to this Scranton-based paper supplier must be resolved.

I. PARTIES
1. Dunder Mifflin DC, the greatest paper company to exist in Redmont.
2. The Commonwealth of Redmont

II. FACTS
1. According to §6.1 of the Appropriations Process Act, a transcript of all budgets logged in the #budget channel must be made available to the public at the passage of every budget bill. The Defendant has not followed this clause and has repeatedly violated it. As listed here, highlighted in red are the times where it took either (a) over a month after the passage of the next bill for a transcript to be released; or (b) no transcript was released whatsoever:

Budget Month	Date Passed	Transcript Released
February 2021	February 8 2021	March 9 2021
March 2021	March 5 2021	September 21 2021
April 2021	April 4 2021	September 21 2021
May 2021	May 2 2021	September 21 2021
June 2021	June 7 2021	September 21 2021
August 2021	August 1 2021	September 21 2021
September 2021	September 1 2021	October 5 2021
October 2021	October 4 2021	November 7 2021
November 2021	November 2 2021	Not Posted
December 2021	December 2 2021	Not Posted
January 2022	January 12 2021	N/A

As displayed in this chart, you can see a pattern of inconsistency in a lack of transparency and in a lack to follow the appropriations process as outlined in law. Whereas one could put the reasonable expectation that it may take a few weeks to publish a transcript, countless times again and again have taken over a month, and in some situations, with no budget reports published at all.

2. Dunder Mifflin DC is a paper supplier company that sells paper supplies, including paper, books, book and quills, and bandages. A key customer base to Dunder Mifflin DC includes journalists who publish ingame newspapers with their paper. There is approximately 342 players with the journalist job (According to the SOTC Report, June 2021) and therefore these individuals losing the ability to write about the budget has cost us potential sales. We compiled our total sales, and noticed that our peaks were for the months of September to October, when most of the transcripts were actually published:

3. Dunder Mifflin's CEO, Westray, has been unable to publish memes related to the spending of the government. Due to the lack of budget transparency, regular citizens are unable to see what each department is spending their money on, even when lawfully required. As presented in the image below, the potential for various types of memes is incredibly extensive when it comes to coverage of the budget transcripts:

4. After multiple calls for the Defendant to resolve this issue, they have failed to do so. This includes articles put out by Democracy Daily calling on the Defendant to produce budget transcripts, in addition to constant calls in channels like #politics by others as evidenced in Exhibit #3.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Defendant violated §6.1 of the Appropriations Process Act stating: "(1) A transcript of this channel will be made available to the public at the passage of each Appropriations Bill"
2. The Defendant has caused a loss of potential sales and severe meme-reduction damage.
3. The Defendant's negligence has caused a decrease in lawfully required transparency. The government has a duty of care as the government that signs every single appropriations bill to publish transcripts in accordance with the law.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. A permanent injunction requiring the Defendant to comply with the law and publish the appropriate transcripts within 14 days of the passage of the following bill.
2. Compensation for legal fees incurred, $420
3. A video made about Dunder Mifflin DC is published on the TikTok by the DPA within the next 14 days.
4. A formal apology to Dunder Mifflin DC and to the entire newspaper industry by the President in a press release.
5. A formal statement put in #government-announcements stating regret for the lack of transparency, and acknowledging the importance that the US Television Series "The Office" has on modern day culture.

(Attach evidence and a list of witnesses at the bottom if applicable)

Witnesses:
1. Rurge, frequent customer of Dunder Mifflin DC
2 _Austin27_, frequent customer of Dunder Mifflin DC
3. Partypig678, meme and business expert
4. MilkCrack, meme and finance expert

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 January 2022

 

[Banana]

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

The Defendant is required to appear before the District Court in the case of Dunder Mifflin DC v. Commonwealth.

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.​

 

[nnmc]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

Dunder Mifflin DC
Plaintiff

v.

Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. AFFIRM Facts 1, 2, and 4 of the case
2. DISPUTE Fact 3 of the case, given that alleged loss of meme potential is highly frivolous and has no economic impact
3. AFFIRM all claims for relief except for the "severe meme-reduction damage", which we dispute again because it is frivolous and has no economic impact
4. AFFIRM Prayers for Relief #1 and #2, and the part of #5 regarding a statement expressing regret for lack of transparency
5. DISPUTE Prayers for Relief #3, #4, and the part of #5 regarding The Office. These prayers for relief are frivolous and unnecessary given that the government is already willing to express in an official statement regret to the general public for the lack of transparency.

II. DEFENCES
1. The government admits that it has not complied with §6.1 of the Appropriations Process Act
2. The government agrees with a permanent injunction, $420 in legal fees, and a #government-announcements statement expressing regret to the public for the lack of transparency.
3. However, the request for a DPA TikTok is completely frivolous, unrelated to the circumstances of this case, and serves only as a stunt for attention.
4. An apology to the plaintiff and the newspaper industry is unwarranted, given that the government is willing to apologize to the broader group of the general public. This is again a stunt for attention for the newspaper industry, which has nothing to do with budget transparency issues.
5. Acknowledging the importance of "The Office" has absolutely nothing to do with budgetary issues. The plaintiff is known for aggressively promoting The Office, so it seems this is yet again a stunt for attention for the plaintiff's personal agenda, rather than a legitimate form of relief for the facts of the 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 15th day of January 2022

 

[Banana]

We will now move on to opening statements. The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post their statement, or we will move on without it.

 

[Westray]

Your honour, the Plaintiff would agree with dropping the 3rd request for a DPA TikTok video to be made. However, we do not believe that the government should be able to get off with this severe and shameful disregard for the law.

The Defendant admits to their wrongdoing and how they have failed to comply with §6.1 of the Appropriations Process Act, yet they fail to acknowledge the extensive impacts that the inconsistency of transparency has resulted in.

Response to an Apology to the Journalistic Industry

The Plaintiff rejects the notion that this is a stunt for the journalistic industry. The reality is that there is over 300 players with the journalist job who have not been privy to information that was supposed to be public as required by law. While it would be unreasonable to request compensatory damages as we have no way to determine that, we find that it would be beyond reasonable doubt that the journalist industry has been impacted in at least one way by these actions.

In addition to this, the Defendant has continued to exemplify a pattern of neglect for the press and for transparency, especially in the past month. If you take a look at the SOTC Reports, the last time that any statistic on journalists was made was in the October 2021 SOTC Report, whereby there was 408 with the journalist job. Since the November 2021 SOTC Report, there has been no mention of the journalist job. In conjunction with this, the government's incompetence has resulted in no further SOTC Reports for December.

Let me list this transparency:

• The Defendant stopped listing statistics on journalists in the SOTC Reports.
• The Defendant stopped publishing budget reports as required by law.
• The Defendant stopped publishing cabinet meeting notes.
• The Defendant has held little to no press conferences.

We would equate a lackin thereof in transparency to be a key harm to the press, as there becomes less and less for newspaper companies to report on.

Response to an Apology to the Plaintiff

Due to the Defendant's willful disregard and neglect of the law, the Plaintiff has had to bring this conflict before the court. In addition to this, as specified in our filing, the sales of Dunder Mifflin DC have declined on the months whereby budget transcripts were not published, noting Exhibit #1:

If the Defendant refuses to acknowledge the impact on paper sales, then at least they ought to consider issuing this apology to the Plaintiff solely based on the claim for relief in this lawsuit. We have asked for zero compensatory damages (with the exception of mere legal fees), and therefore have requested an apology instead.

Importance of The Office

The television series, The Office, is incredibly crucial to this lawsuit and to the sociocultural notions of Redmont and the world. The Plaintiff, Dunder Mifflin DC, is a paper company inspired directly by the television series, and therefore to claim that it is a "stunt for the Plaintiff's personal agenda" is frivolous and a reach beyond the law at best.

On the main DC discord alone, there has been over 10,000 messages relating to The Office, whether it be a gif or a referencing situation. For the Defendant to claim that it poses no significance in the nation is outright false. In addition to this, the relevance that The Office has on modern day culture is beyond obvious.

The Office has been a long running television series, running from 2005 to 2013, with over 200 episodes. The Office is a commentary on society, referencing relevant topics and bringing light to serious issues, noting:

Episode	Relevance to Society
Season 1 Episode 2 "Diversity Day"	Conveyed the issue of racism and xenophobia.
Season 3 Episode 1 "Gay Witch Hunt"	Discussed homosexuality and homophobia.
Season 3 Episode 3 "The Coup"	Shows the office politics that come into the workplace.
Season 4 Episode 13 "Dinner Party"	Addressed the reality of abusive relationships.
Season 4 Episode 15 "Night Out"	Discussed the issue of drug addiction.
Season 5 Episode 3 "Business Ethics"	Outlined conflicts within ethical behaviours.
Season 5 Episode 11 "Moroccan Christmas"	Conveyed the issue of alcoholism in society.
Season 5 Episode 14 "Stress Relief"	Brought attention to heart disease.

In addition to this, The Office has been the workplace fantasy of the century (According to Vox) with some of the most impactful cinematography in a comedy series, noting this video:

Importance to "Severe Meme Reduction"

The Defendant claims that the loss of potential memes is frivolous and has no economic impact. Whereas we agree with the Defendant that it has no economic impact, we disagree with the claim that it is frivolous. We believe that the social impact is extensive.

We are open to calling multiple expert witnesses who will testify to how budget transparency ultimately would have lead to more memes. The Defendants lack of respect for the law has resulted in this loss of potential memes and social value. This is why we are requesting some sort of apology or regretful statement in this lawsuit.

Severity of Actions

The reality of this case is that the Defendant has broken the law, admitted to it, and wants to get away with their repeated violations without due process. The people have been deprived of lawfully required transparency documents for far too long, and therefore we demand that the Defendant pays the price in abiding by our prayer for relief.

 

[Banana]

Is the Plaintiff moving that the third item in the prayer for relief (the DPA TikTok video) be struck from the prayer for relief and that the lawsuit be considered without it? Please answer yes or no.

 

[Westray]

Is the Plaintiff moving that the third item in the prayer for relief (the DPA TikTok video) be struck from the prayer for relief and that the lawsuit be considered without it? Please answer yes or no.

That would be correct, your honour. We are happy to concede our third item in the prayer for relief. However, we continue to assert that the Defendant has violated the law and therefore should be subject to all other terms.

 

[Banana]

The Plaintiff's request is granted and item 3 of the prayer for relief is struck. The Defense may proceed with their opening statments.

 

[nnmc]

OPENING STATEMENT

we find that it would be beyond reasonable doubt that the journalist industry has been impacted in at least one way by these actions.

It is not the government’s job to create stories for newspapers to report on. The government is not a money making machine for newspapers. Furthermore, the news industry is heavily based on Discord posts, rather than in-game. This means that the newspaper industry uses relatively little paper, meaning the Plaintiff’s business is hardly affected.

The Plaintiff, Dunder Mifflin DC, is a paper company inspired directly by the television series, and therefore to claim that it is a "stunt for the Plaintiff's personal agenda" is frivolous and a reach beyond the law at best.

It does not matter what the name of the company is and where the name came from. The company name has absolutely nothing to do with the facts of the case or the claims for relief. If the company were hypothetically named Redmont Paper Company, it would not make any difference to the case. This case regards a lack of transparency announcements by the name of the government, and the plaintiff’s name doesn’t factor into that issue at all.

For the Defendant to claim that it poses no significance in the nation is outright false. In addition to this, the relevance that The Office has on modern day culture is beyond obvious.

It is besides the point to argue whether or not The Office is significant to the nation and culture. Again, we are talking about the appropriations process and lack of transparency. As great as The Office may be, it does not relate to the situation.

We are open to calling multiple expert witnesses who will testify to how budget transparency ultimately would have lead to more memes.

Once more, it is not the government’s job to provide fodder for news stories or memes.

I object to the repeated use of The Office videos, statistics, information, and related arguments on the grounds of lack of relevance. I ask that all of it be struck from the record, and that further similar behavior be considered contempt of court.

 

[Banana]

Does the Plaintiff wish to respond to the objection?

 

[Westray]

Yes, your honour. In accordance with the Objections Guide, the Defendant has made this objection on the mere "lack of relevance" to which I will briefly dispute. All of the evidence presented in this case poses significant relevancy to the matter at hand. I will explain the purpose to each point of evidence:

Exhibit #1 - Chart of Company Sales
This is a formal company document that serves as evidence of lost sales during the months in which there was no budget transcript released.

Exhibit #2 - Example Meme
This is an example of a meme that could have been made in regards to the adequate release of the budget transcripts. Your honour, we are trying to argue that the Defendant's willful disregard of the rule of law resulted in the loss of potential public discourse - including the loss of potential memes posted in regards to the transcripts. The Defendant may not agree with this notion but shouldn't object to a fact so crucial to this case.

Exhibit #3 - Picture of Article
This is evidence of an article discussing the topic of the lack of transparency and the government's willful violation of the law. Even after the Defendant was asked to follow the Appropriations Process, they refused, or at the very least, willfully neglected, this law.

Exhibit #4 - Picture of Chestshop
This is evidence of some of the goods that Dunder Mifflin DC sells, in conjunction with our argument of lost sales.

Exhibit #5 - Picture of the Budget Transcript Subforum
This is evidence of the Defendant's constant malfeasance and inconsistency to follow the Appropriations Process

Exhibit #6 - Video Clip of "The Genius Cinematography of the Office | Video Essay"
In our Prayer for Relief #5, we have asked the Defendant to acknowledge the modern day relevancy that The Office poses in a government announcement. The Defendant has refuted this, so in our opening statement we have presented information and evidence to prove that the television series The Office is not only relevant to the modern day, but also to the people of Redmont. This comes in line as the Defendant has repeatedly made references to pop culture and or sarcasm in #government-announcements before.

To strike down any of the evidence, no matter how absurd the Defendant may believe it is, would be a severe disregard for the facts of this case. Rather than striking key evidence, the Defendant's focus should be on rebutting the arguments in which the evidence connects to.

Your honour, this objection has no grounds. Every piece of evidence presented ties into our arguments in this case.

The Defendant continuously also states "It is not the government's job to do x". Well I would pose this question to the Defendant. What is the government's job? Does the government's job entail the willful neglect of such a basic prospect of the law?

Thank you for providing us the opportunity to respond to this repugnant and outlandish objection.

 

[Banana]

I remind the Plaintiff that as the Defendant's objection had strictly to do with references to The Office, and using it as a basis for personal loss, there is no request to strike any other aspect of this case.

After everything has been presented, and both arguments made, I am going to sustain the objection. The Plaintiff has failed to show how The Office relates in any way to the frequency and timeliness of government budget reports, which is the focus of this case. Any previous mentions of The Office or its impact on the community are struck from the record, and any future attempts to bring it into this case may be met with a contempt of court charge.

As both parties have presented their opening statements, they may now submit a list of witnesses to be called to testify, or declare that they have none.

 

[Westray]

Your honour, I would like to call upon the following witnesses:

• xerxesmc
  • DEC Deputy Secretary and Business Expert
• Hugebob23456
  • Former Congressman and President, Budget Expert
• MilkCrack
  • Representative and member of the Congressional Budget Committee
• Partypig678
  • Meme Expert
• _Austin27_
  • Frequent Customer of Dunder Mifflin DC
• Rurge
  • Frequent Customer of Dunder Mifflin DC
• LilDigiVert
  • Frequent Customer of Dunder Mifflin DC

These witnesses will reaffirm the Defendant's wrongdoings, assert the potential loss of meme culture, and provide their expert upon on this key budget issue.

 

[nnmc]

The government has no witnesses.

The government objects on grounds of lack of relevance to Partypig being a “meme expert” witness. Memes are not relevant to the budget, and neither the Constitution nor the law require the government to be amusing enough to create meme content.

Partypig thus has nothing relevant to offer the court, and he should not be summoned as a witness.

 

[Banana]

Does the Plaintiff wish to respond to this objection? The Court requests that any response be kept brief and focused on the utility of Partypig678 as a witness, and only that topic.

 

[Westray]

Your honour, Partypig678 is a frequent poster of various memes related to the server and is an expert on the topic. We hope to have him testify to assert the potential loss of meme culture that the Defendant's actions caused.

 

[Banana]

And does the Plaintiff wish to respond to the objection to the inclusion of memes in this lawsuit?

 

[Westray]

Your honour, as specified in §2 of our Claims for Relief, it states:

The Defendant has caused a loss of potential sales and severe meme-reduction damage.

This is an element of our case against the Defendant, to claim that this lack of lawfully required transparency resulted in less memes.

 

[Banana]

I will be sustaining the objection against memes, as they and the ability to make them from the government are not a serious matter to be taken before this court. This being said, Partypig678 is listed as a witness related to memes and will not be testifying. All other witnesses will be summoned shortly.

 

[Banana]

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

@xerxesmc, @HugeBob, @Milkcrack, @Austin27, @Rurge, and @LilDigiVert are hereby summoned to the District Court of the Commonwealth of Redmont in Dunder Mifflin DC v. The Commonwealth [2022] DCR 5 as witnesses. Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present. You will receive questions from the plaintiff and may also be cross-examined.

I ask that the plaintiff provides a list of all the questions they want answered by each witness in a single post. If some questions need to be withheld as they depend on answers given to earlier questions, that is also considered reasonable. When the plaintiff is ready and all witnesses have declared themselves present, they may ask questions to the witnesses. Then the defense will be given the opportunity to cross-examine.

Witnesses are reminded of the laws regarding testimony and this is a warning to all witnesses that providing knowingly false testimony is illegal pursuant to the Perjury Act. It is expected that you will tell the truth in court.​

 

[Rurge]

I am present, your honor.

 

[LilDigiVert]

I present, you honor

 

[HugeBob]

 

[Austin27]

I, Austin27, valued Dunder Mifflin customer, am present your honor.

 

[Banana]

View attachment 20917

Please take this seriously, or you may receive a contempt of court charge. Thank you.

 

[Westray]

Thank you, your honour. Some follow-up questions may need to be asked dependent on the witness answers.

xerxesmc
1. Is it true that Dunder Mifflin DC has had more sales than Costco in the months of transcript transparency?
2. In your professional opinion as the leader of the Business Team in the DEC, do you think that this lack of transparency impacted paper sales?
3. Do you believe that this administration has displayed a pattern of disregard for the law in terms of budget usage?
4. Have you witnessed any violations of the Appropriations Process Act firsthand?

Hugebob23456
1. As a former congressman involved in the budget process, how do you feel about the lack of transparency in regards to these transcripts?
2. Do you feel that this administration has displayed criminal negligence in regards to the law?
3. Do you think that the prominence of Scranton makes Pennsylvania a better state than Georgia?

MilkCrack
1. As a congressman currently involved in the budget committee, how do you feel about the lack of transparency in regards to these transcripts?
2. Is it true that on multiple occasions you notified the Defendant of violations of the Appropriations Process Act? If so, did they or did they not address their violations?

Rurge
1. As a frequent customer of Dunder Mifflin DC, how often do you buy from there?
2. Did you shop less at Dunder Mifflin DC as a result of the lack of budget transcript transparency from the Defendant?
3. Is Toby the worst?

_Austin27_
1. As a frequent customer of Dunder Mifflin DC, how often do you buy from there?
2. Did you shop less at Dunder Mifflin DC as a result of the lack of budget transcript transparency from the Defendant?

LilDigiVert
1. As a frequent customer of Dunder Mifflin DC, how often do you buy from there?
2. Did you shop less at Dunder Mifflin DC as a result of the lack of budget transcript transparency from the Defendant?
3. As Vice President do you recall at any point the Defendant willfully violating the Appropriations Process Act?
4. As Vice President have you witnessed firsthand any malfeasance from the Defendant in regards to the budget?
5. Is it true that $300,000 out of the budget was given to the town of Aventura?

I'd also like to remind the Vice President that he is under oath and should answer these truthfully, no matter how poorly it may reflect on the Defendant.

 

[Banana]

As not all witnesses have declared themselves present, I request that none of the questions be answered by the witnesses until all are accounted for.

 

[HugeBob]

1. I am not familiar with the current state of budget reports in the current administration.

2. I have not read the evidence presented in this case and would like to test whether or not I am permitted to simply refuse to read a case before testifying.

3. ABSOLUTELY NOT. Scranton, while popular in the 90's and early 2000's, will fizzle from pop culture now that the Office has been removed from the American Netflix offerings. This is because the amount of influence that other countries (for example: Canada) have over global Internet culture is directly proportional to their relevance in the world (read: if it isn't America, no one cares). Georgia on the other hand is home to a small town by the name of Cumming. I'm not necessarily suggesting that there's anything notable about that name. YOU are the pervert. I'm simply stating that Georgia has much cooler towns than Pennsylvania. On top of that, Georgia is becoming a more important state politically as Pennsylvania had already been accepted as a swing state, Georgia's new status as a swing state obligates both parties to spend more resources campaigning in the state, something that is especially bad for the party that previously considered it safe for state wide elections.

 

[HugeBob]

Oh I was already typing, my bad lmao

 

[Rurge]

1. As a frequent customer of Dunder Mifflin DC, how often do you buy from there?
Very often, I love paper. I even bought 1 million dollars worth of paper products from a salesman before. The prices had never been lower.

2. Did you shop less at Dunder Mifflin DC as a result of the lack of budget transcript transparency from the Defendant?
Definitely. There was a huge lack of transparency from the Defendant giving me no reason to prank my co-workers which I had needed paper for. Dunder Mifflin DC is my go-to company, not Michael Scott Paper Company, and this lack of budget transcript transparency gave me no need, whatsoever, to buy any paper.

3. Is Toby the worst?
Why would you even ask this? We all know Toby is the worst. He stopped Andy and Dwight in the middle of their rendition of "Take my home, Country Roads" by John Denver. No wonder his wife divorced him.

 

[xerxesmc]

1. No, you're insane.
2. Refer to #1.
3. I do think this administration has shown a disregard to the budget unfortunately.
4. Yes, I have witnessed it in both the DEC and the DCT.

why are u wasting my time

 

[Westray]

Your honour, after some discussion we have reached a deal with the Defendant. The Plaintiff's goal was to ensure that the Defendant would comply with the law, which they have now agreed to after some negotiation.

We await your approval for the following deal:

• The Defendant will comply with the law and publish the appropriate transcripts within 14 days of the passage of the following appropriations bill.
• The Defendant will issue a formal apology for the lack of transparency in #government-announcements, pinging @Politics and referencing this lawsuit.
• The Defendant will provide compensation for the legal fees incurred, $420.

The following proof of this deal is attached:

 

[Banana]

Before I deal with any settlement that may have been made, I must address a serious issue I have noticed. Court is not a place to make jokes, nor to make a mockery of the judicial institution.
HugeBob, you were warned directly to take this matter seriously. You have failed to do so, by your answer to the plaintiff's questions, and I find you in contempt of court for disrupting these proceedings. Rurge, you have attempted to disrupt the proceedings with your beyond absurd answers to the questions provided, and I find you, likewise, in contempt of court.

I hereby request that the DoJ:
Fine HugeBob $250 for his first offence of Contempt of Court, and
Fine Rurge $250 for his first offence of Contempt of Court.

 

[Westray]

Your honour, apologies if this is deemed out of turn, however I feel that we may require some clarification in regards to your most recent post. I am a bit disoriented as to whether or not you had made a decision on our settlement?

I only ask as it would be within the best interests of the law if the Defendant could comply with the Appropriations Process Act as soon as possible. I thank the court again for their time.

 

[Banana]

The last post was to deal with the contempt of court charges that needed to be brought. The court is now in recess and I will have a verdict by this weekend.

 

[Banana]

Verdict

This case is hereby dismissed as a settlement has been agreed to out of court, and is accepted. The court thanks both parties for their time.