Lawsuit: Adjourned ItzBananaMuffin v. PerfectedRylint [2021] DCR 77

[Banana]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


ItzBananaMuffin
Plaintiff

v.

PerfectedRylint
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

After several lottery-type events by Icypenguin79, PerfectedRylint advertised the same thing and then failed to follow through when the terms were met.


I. PARTIES
1. ItzBananaMuffin (Plaintiff)
2. PerfectedRylint (Defendant)

II. FACTS
1. Icypenguin79 put up several lottery messages in the global chat wherein the first person to send a sum of money received the amount doubled.
2. The Plaintiff won two of these events, and Teuntje1234567 won another.
3. The Plaintiff won two $100 buy-in lotteries for $200 in rewards each, and Teuntje1234567 won a $1,000 buy-in, $2,000 reward lottery.
4. Several other of these lotteries appeared in chat, but the Plaintiff ignored these, as the risk-to-reward was too high, or he did not have enough for the buy-in.
5. The Defendant put a message in the chat advertising a lottery with the same terms as the one that Teuntje1234567 won.
6. The Plaintiff entered his $1,000, as seen in evidence exhibit 2.
7. The Defendant then claimed that they were only joking, and were not actually going to pay the reward.
8. The Defendant sent back the Plaintiff's money when the Plaintiff asked for the reward.
9. The Defendant acknowledged that the Plaintiff would have won the $2,000 reward.


III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Defendant knowingly asked for $1,000 in chat, never indicating that it was a joke, and never giving any reason to assume it was anything but a legitimate lottery, as had been done multiple times prior to this.
2. The Plaintiff logically accepted the risk of this proposition and put forward $1,000 of his own money.
3. The Defendant then retracted their verbal agreement after the Plaintiff had already paid.
4. The Defendant failed to pay the legally owed reward as a result of the lottery.
5. False advertising is defined as: "Any advertising or promotion that misrepresents the nature, characteristics, qualities or geographic origin of goods, services or commercial activities"
6. The Defendant misrepresented the nature of the lottery service, and as such the Plaintiff is legally entitled to compensation on the basis of false advertising.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $1,000 in the reward from the lottery
2. $100 in time costs, as the Plaintiff is an Attorney

Spoiler: Evidence: Chat Log

The legitimate lotteries by Icypenguin79

The false advertising by PerfectedRylint

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 24th day of December, 2021
(Edited for capitalization of a name I had mistyped)
(Edited again to fix numbering, last one I swear)

 

[SumoMC]

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

@PerfectedRylint is required to appear before the court in the case of itzbananamuffin v. perfectedrylint [2021 DCR 77]. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​

 

[PerfectedRylint]

i would like an extention please. since its the holidays and spending time with family so i dont have moch time.

 

[SumoMC]

The Court will grant a 48 hour extension to the Defendant.

With this time, if the defendant needs legal counsel, i advise going to the RBA and requesting a public defender.

This court will reconvene on Tuesday, December 28th at 15:13 EST

 

[Banana]

Seeing as how we both have difficult situations with scheduling, I move to reconvene this court on the 2nd of January, if that would suit the Defendant as well. By this time, I will be back from visiting family, and I will be back at my normal level of activity. If not, then I will continue this suit, but my response times will be slower, so I thank everyone for their patience.

 

[PerfectedRylint]

Seeing as how we both have difficult situations with scheduling, I move to reconvene this court on the 2nd of January, if that would suit the Defendant as well. By this time, I will be back from visiting family, and I will be back at my normal level of activity. If not, then I will continue this suit, but my response times will be slower, so I thank everyone for their patience.

Yes I agree to that lol

 

[SumoMC]

This court is hereby in recess until January 2nd at 12pm EST.

If the defendant does not present a answer by then, I will have to proceed.

 

[Chantiu]

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

ItzBananaMuffin
Plaintiff

v.

PerfectedRylint (Lovely Law Firm Representing)
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. Dispute:
The defendant clearly stated that it was a joke in the text below.

2. Dispute:
Being that the Plaintiff knowingly took this risk by giving random strangers money. This occurrence should not affect my client.

3. Dispute
The defendant never explicitly stated that they were not going to pay the Plaintiff.

4. Dispute
The defendant never promoted nor advertised that they were giving away any funds. They were merely copying what Icypenguin79 stated in a joining matter.



II. DEFENCES
The defendant was simply joking about the incident and was copying what Icypenguin79 state. My client should not be penalized for the Plantiff’s poor judgement. It is never good to send money to strangers. Especially since they never explicitly stated that they were doing a lottery.


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 2 day of January 2022

 

[SumoMC]

We will now proceed to opening statements

 

[Banana]

OPENING STATEMENT

This situation which we are about to discuss in detail occurred from a series of conscious decisions on the behalf of the Defendant. By making these decisions, they knowingly misled at least one person, and possibly others. The Defendant must thus logically be held accountable for their actions and words.

First, the Defendant took advantage of a legitimate system that existed at the time. Icypenguin established a communal trust that the lotteries they advertised were legitimate. In each instance, of which there were at least four, Icypenguin paid out the winnings as per their own stated rules. This did not break any laws, rules, or other regulations, and provided a game of speed and luck for players on the server. In a sense, these lotteries were fair, because everyone had a chance of winning if they could type fast enough.

In contrast, I present the Defendant’s actions. They put a similar message in the chat to one sent out by Icypenguin during the lotteries. There was no indication or message by the Defendant to tell anyone they were “joking” or were anything but completely serious about the lottery. Following a completely logical thought process, the Plaintiff decided to enter the lottery and try his hand, similar to how it had worked with Icypenguin’s. The Plaintiff thus put up his own money as a risk with the expectation that at least one person would receive the reward. The Plaintiff would have won, as confirmed by the Defendant later, but nothing was heard back for some time. Then, the Defendant claimed they were joking after they had already received the Plaintiff’s money. Only when the Plaintiff challenged them to pay, was his money returned. Despite wholeheartedly accepting the risk of losing the lottery, the Plaintiff put forward money towards what turned out to be the Defendant accepting no risk, but taking money. That type of exchange is a blatant failure to follow through on what was advertised and constitutes fraud.

In response to what the Defense would have to say about this exchange, I have the following comments.

First and foremost, the Defendant only stated that their comments were a joke after the Plaintiff had sent his money. They had plenty of time to declare their intentions before anyone put forth money.

If the risk of giving someone money lies entirely on the person giving the money, even when there is a spoken guarantee that something will be given back, then there is no protection against scams when selling anything via any method but a sell chest. This is completely ridiculous and an absurd rule to expect people to live by.

The Defendant paid back the Plaintiff’s original money but never what should have been paid. If their intentions were to, then why did they not? They certainly received enough of an opportunity to do so without litigation. This is merely an attempt to throw a red herring in the way of justice, and holds no real bearing on their actions.

As to the final point, there is a very serious instance of perjury presented here. The Defense has claimed that the Defendant never advertised or promoted the giving away of any funds. This is completely in contrast to the hard evidence as seen in the chat log. The Defendant stated specifically “send me 1k to get 2k”, in a global channel, for everyone on the server to see. The Defense has openly lied in their response to the lawsuit, as the Defendant promoted the exact exchange described above, and re-posted below with the comment underlined.

Spoiler: Perjury Proof: PerfectedRylint Promoting

 

[SumoMC]

The Defendant may present their opening remarks

 

[SumoMC]

I ask that @PerfectedRylint submit their opening statement within 48 hours, or the court will be moving forward without it.

 

[Chantiu]

I would like to request an extension as I am dealing with possible covid exposure. I need a few days to recuperate.

 

[SumoMC]

I will grant a 72 hour extension as I understand real life comes before game, although if you can not represent the defendent in a timely manner, it would be in the best interest of the defendant to seek new counsel.

This court adjourned until Monday at this time.

 

[SumoMC]

We will now be moving forward without the Defenses opening statement. Would the plaintiff like to call any witnesses?

 

[Banana]

I call Icypenguin79 and Teuntje1234567 as witnesses, Your Honor.

 

[SumoMC]

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

@Teuntje1234567 and @Icypenguin79 is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of itzBananamuffin v. PerfectedRylint. Failure to appear within 48 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.​

 

[Icypenguin79]

I am present, your honour.

 

[SumoMC]

Since the other witness has neglected to appear before this court, we will move on without them. @BananaMuffinMC may post their questions in one post.

 

[Banana]

Icypenguin79:
1. Did you sponsor a lottery-style giveaway in the global chat, wherein the first person to pay you money would receive a set sum in return?
There will be follow-up questions, which will be put into a single post if possible.

 

[Teuntje1234567]

Ope I didnt see that ping before, I am now present if I'm still needed.

 

[SumoMC]

You may be questioned

 

[Banana]

For Teuntje1234567:
1. Did you participate in one or more lottery-style giveaways hosted by Icypenguin79?
2. If yes, did you receive your winnings as you expected to?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or illegitimacy in the message PerfectedRylint sent in global chat?

 

[Icypenguin79]

Icypenguin79:
1. Did you sponsor a lottery-style giveaway in the global chat, wherein the first person to pay you money would receive a set sum in return?
There will be follow-up questions, which will be put into a single post if possible.

Yes, I did sponsor such a giveaway.

 

[Banana]

Follow-up questions for Icypenguin79:
1. Did you, each and every time, pay out the winnings to the proper party?
2. Was the message sent by PerfectedRylint designed, in your opinion as a host of lotteries, to be the same type of system, where there would be at least one winner?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or being insincere in PerfectedRylint's message?

 

[Icypenguin79]

Follow-up questions for Icypenguin79:
1. Did you, each and every time, pay out the winnings to the proper party?
2. Was the message sent by PerfectedRylint designed, in your opinion as a host of lotteries, to be the same type of system, where there would be at least one winner?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or being insincere in PerfectedRylint's message?

Yes, I paid the appropriate winnings to the proper party each time I hosted such a lottery.

In my opinion, PerfectedRylint’s message was designed in an identical manner to mine, implying the same rules and procedure - where there is at least one winner.

I did not see any indication of joking or insincerity in his message.

 

[SumoMC]

I will be taking over as the defendants Council.

 

[SumoMC]

 

[Teuntje1234567]

For Teuntje1234567:
1. Did you participate in one or more lottery-style giveaways hosted by Icypenguin79?
2. If yes, did you receive your winnings as you expected to?
3. Did you see any indication of joking or illegitimacy in the message PerfectedRylint sent in global chat?

1. Yes I did, iirc I participated in 2 or 3 of them.
2. I won all of the times I participated and received my price as promised.
3. I did not, they were advertising it the same way as Icypenguin79 did and they didnt make it either sound like a joke or make it clear in any way that it was.

 

[Banana]

No further questions, Your Honor.

 

[JoeGamer]

Seeing the presiding judge on this case has resigned, I will be presiding for the remainder of this case.

Does the defense wish to cross examine the witnesses?

 

[SumoMC]

Yes your honor

 

[JoeGamer]

Mr. SumoMC, you may cross examine the witnesses. Please clearly label questions for specific witnesses if needed.

 

[SumoMC]

We will not be cross examining the witnesses.

 

[JoeGamer]

Does the defense wish to call any witnesses to the stand?

 

[SumoMC]

Yes your Honor,

-BananaMuffinMC
-PerfectedRylint

 

[JoeGamer]

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

@BananaMuffinMC and @PerfectedRylint are hereby summoned to the District Court of Redmont in ItzBananaMuffin v. PerfectedRylint [2021] DCR 77 as witnesses. Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present. You will receive questions from the defense and may also be cross-examined.

I ask that the defense 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 defense is ready, you may ask questions to the witnesses. Then the plaintiff will be given the opportunity to cross-examine.

I am hereby informing each witness to ensure they are aware of the provisions of the law of perjury and its severity. Giving knowingly false testimony is highly illegal. Witnesses are required to tell the truth in their testimonies, pursuant to the Perjury Act.

Once the witnesses of the defense have been questioned and cross-examined, the court will proceed to closing statements.​

 

[Banana]

Your Honor, I object to my being called as a witness as I am, and am representing, the Plaintiff in this case, and it would thus be inappropriate to testify under the circumstances.

 

[SumoMC]

Your Honor,

The plaintiff is representing themselves, not allowing the defense to question the accuser would hender the defense from making a proper defense.

 

[PerfectedRylint]

View attachment 20888

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

@BananaMuffinMC and @PerfectedRylint are hereby summoned to the District Court of Redmont in ItzBananaMuffin v. PerfectedRylint [2021] DCR 77 as witnesses. Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present. You will receive questions from the defense and may also be cross-examined.

I ask that the defense 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 defense is ready, you may ask questions to the witnesses. Then the plaintiff will be given the opportunity to cross-examine.

I am hereby informing each witness to ensure they are aware of the provisions of the law of perjury and its severity. Giving knowingly false testimony is highly illegal. Witnesses are required to tell the truth in their testimonies, pursuant to the Perjury Act.

Once the witnesses of the defense have been questioned and cross-examined, the court will proceed to closing statements.​

I am present

 

[JoeGamer]

Mr. Sumo, would you like to respond to the objection?

 

[SumoMC]

I did your honor

 

[JoeGamer]

Your Honor, I object to my being called as a witness as I am, and am representing, the Plaintiff in this case, and it would thus be inappropriate to testify under the circumstances.

After careful consideration, I have decide to overrule the objection. Mr. Sumo please ask your question to the witnesses.

 

[JoeGamer]

Mr. Sumo you have 48 hours to post your questions.

 

[JoeGamer]

Seeing as Mr. Sumo has not asked questions within the allotted time, the court will move on without the witnesses.
The witnesses are dismissed. Thank you for your time.

Mr. Sumo you are found in contempt of court and fine you $50. I order the DOJ to fine xSumoMC $50.

We now move to closing statements. The plaintiff has 48 hours to provide a closing statement to the court.

 

[Banana]

CLOSING STATEMENT
Your Honor, opposing counsel, I believe this case is very much an open-and-shut one. The Defendant knowingly and with malicious intent deceived the Plaintiff, making an oral contract they had no intent to fulfill. Not only this, but the Plaintiff had to deliberately challenge the lack of a payment in order to receive the money paid back. This is not even including the winnings that were rightfully earned by the rules of the competition.

The Defendant clearly advertised that they were giving away funds, and would pay $2,000 to anyone who sent them $1,000. Per the stipulations of their contract, it was not even the first person only who would receive the money, so by paying $1,000, the Plaintiff fulfilled every requirement of the open contract issued in the global chat. The Defendant then became responsible for paying the Plaintiff $2,000, which they never did, nor stated any intent to.

As we have seen in the witness testimonies, the Defendant modeled their scheme after a legitimate giveaway done in the global chat, but simply failed to follow through on their promises. This is a breach of contract, making them liable to pay back any owed amounts. Thus, the Defendant owes the Plaintiff the remaining $1,000 as a part of the oral contract.

Seeing as there is no mitigating circumstance, such as an indication that the Defendant was joking, or any immediate return of the Plaintiff’s money, the Defendant should be held accountable in full for the promises they had made. In accordance, I urge the court to decide in favor of the Plaintiff in the amount of $1,100, to include the rightfully won award as well as legal fees.
Thank you.

 

[JoeGamer]

Thank you BananaMuffinMC. The court calls for the defense to provide their closing statement. Please provide your closing statement with 48 hours or you will be held in contempt.

 

[SumoMC]

Closing Statement

The facts of this case is clear, Mr. Banana fell for a funny joke. My client saw that they were saying this in public chat and jokingly said it too. My client, after realizing banana was serious, sent him his money back. My client did not keep his money nor did he try to.

The simple fact of this case is banana didn't take the joke well and now wants to make a quick buck. My client never had any intent of doing this and he made that very clear. If we try to hold everyone accountable for jokes they make in Global Chat, these courts would never get a break, our jails would be overfilled and laws would need to constantly be changed.

My client isn't guilty, he made a simple joke. Never did he expect to have this blow out of proportion. If the court choses the grant this prayer for relief, this will set a bad precedent for the future.

 

[JoeGamer]

Verdict

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
ItzBananaMuffin v. PerfectedRylint [2021] DCR 77

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The defendant, PerfectedRylint, created a verbal contract with the plaintiff by offering to double the money of the first person to send him money.
2. PerfectedRylint claims of the situation being a joke were not clear and present at the time he proposed his contract.
3. Based on the lottery guidelines set by previous lottery holders, the plaintiff should have got their winnings.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. PerfectedRylint was clearly joking when he posted the lottery.
2. PerfectedRylint was copying what Icypenguin79 lottery as a joke, and was not to be taken seriously.
3. After realizing that Banana fell for the defendant’s joke, PerfectedRylint sent the original money back.

III. THE COURT OPINION
1. The defendant's claims of the original lottery being a joke are not clearly portrayed as a joke through the chat logs. Seeing Icypenguin79 post his real lottery followed by PerfectedRylint can be confusing to those participating in the lottery. The court agrees that it was not clear that a joke was present. Unless it is reasonably shown as a joke, claiming a lottery as a joke to avoid payment is not valid for voiding a lottery.
2. Was there a contract present? The plaintiff claims that there was a valid contract between the lottery host, PerfectedRylient, and the lottery participant, ItzBananaMuffin. In the court’s opinion, there was no valid contract, and therefore, PerfectedRylient was in no way obligated to fulfill their lottery. Under the Foundation of Contract Law §10.1, a contract must have reasonable consideration to a normal person to create legal relations. This “contact” gives no look at any formalities, it’s vague in wording, and there is no reliability that the contract will even be fulfilled (§10.3 of the Foundation of Contract Law). The lottery holder is in no way reliable to tell the truth. There is nothing verifiable in their claims of the outcome of the lottery. For example, if I was to hold a lottery and persons a, b, c, d, and e all participated and submit a buy-in in that order, there would be no way for any person involved to know the true outcome of the lottery. This inability to verify claims within the contract makes the contract null and void. Look at it this way, you are sending money to a complete stranger and hoping that they are honest and give you the money back. It sounds as ridiculous as it’s been betrayed, but if you send money to strangers, you may not like the outcomes.

IV. DECISION
The federal court holds that the contract between PerfectedRylint and ItzBananaMuffin was null and void as it did not set up proper intentions to create legal relations. While claiming a joke is not a proper reason to cancel a lottery, given the fact the PerfectedRylint paid the buy-in of the lottery back to ItzBananaMuffin tells the court that this was not an attempt to scam people out of money.

I hereby rule in favor of the defendant.

The Federal Court thanks all involved. This case is hereby adjourned.