- Joined
- Dec 21, 2021
- Messages
- 39
- Thread Author
- #1
- Client Name: CrackerAmoeba1
- Counsel Name: Lovely Law
- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Yes
- Reason for the Appeal: The Honorable Judge Relaxedgv ruled that "I will be dismissing this case under Court Rule 5.5. To put this simply, no proof was shown that there the actions did in fact harm their reputation. " however, the case was dismissed before discovery in which proof could be provided. Historically, claim 5.5 has been denied if filed before the discovery process has taken place, since during the discovery process evidence supporting the claim can be given to the court. In 2024 fcr19 relaxedgv states that "The argument of lack of evidence should not even be considered as since the installation of Discovery all evidence has been provided within Discovery thus voiding the entire argument. Now, if that was used at the end of Discovery that would be a different argument entirely, given this was posted not long after this has started I would not be able to in good faith dismiss this case on those answers." This precedent set by him directly contradicts his current ruling. We would like a fair chance to present our argument, evidence, and claims.
- Additional Information: I motion for the recusal of Justice RelaxedGV given his role in the original Federal Court case. The plaintiff thanks the Supreme Court for its time and consideration in reviewing this appeal request.
- Counsel Name: Lovely Law
- Were you originally the plaintiff or the defendant: Yes
- Reason for the Appeal: The Honorable Judge Relaxedgv ruled that "I will be dismissing this case under Court Rule 5.5. To put this simply, no proof was shown that there the actions did in fact harm their reputation. " however, the case was dismissed before discovery in which proof could be provided. Historically, claim 5.5 has been denied if filed before the discovery process has taken place, since during the discovery process evidence supporting the claim can be given to the court. In 2024 fcr19 relaxedgv states that "The argument of lack of evidence should not even be considered as since the installation of Discovery all evidence has been provided within Discovery thus voiding the entire argument. Now, if that was used at the end of Discovery that would be a different argument entirely, given this was posted not long after this has started I would not be able to in good faith dismiss this case on those answers." This precedent set by him directly contradicts his current ruling. We would like a fair chance to present our argument, evidence, and claims.
- Additional Information: I motion for the recusal of Justice RelaxedGV given his role in the original Federal Court case. The plaintiff thanks the Supreme Court for its time and consideration in reviewing this appeal request.
Last edited:
