Lawsuit: Adjourned JP MORGAN V. MIGHTYMONKEY576 [2022] FCR 80

[Matthew100x]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


JP Morgan (Prodigium | Attorneys at Law Representing. Counsel: Matthew100x, Co-Counsel: Nnmc)
Plaintiff

v.

MightyMonkey576
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

The plaintiff, JP Morgan, under the direction of Overlordofpeonys, established a $50,000 dollar loan with the defendant, MightyMonkey576, with a fixed simple interest rate of 15% for a return of $57,500 dollars. The contract stipulated that payments for the loan was to be done in weekly installments and to be completed by December 1st. The defendant made their first payment of $3,593.75 dollars and then stopped repayment on the loan. Efforts were made to get the defendant to pay the loan: messages in the loan channel for the plaintiff's discord were made, the plaintiff’s employees attempted to contact the defendant privately, and the plaintiff’s counsel sent a demand letter requesting repayment. All requests were ignored by the defendant.

We therefore charge this defendant of being in breach of the contract that they made with the plaintiff for violating the plaintiff’s consideration.


I. PARTIES
1. Plaintiff, JP Morgan (Now known as “JPM Credit Union”)
2. Defendant, MightyMonkey576
3. The Exchange (On Notice for Assets)
4. Tello Bank (On Notice for Assets)
5. Belmont Financial Group (On Notice for Assets)

II. FACTS
1. One $50,000 dollar loan was made to the defendant by the plaintiff. (Exhibit A)
2. This loan, establishes a simple bilateral contract agreed to on discord, meets the standard definition of a contract by the standards of The Contract Law Foundation Act.
3. The Contract passes the Unfair Terms test.
4. The payments for the loan was to be $3,593.75 per week over the course of four months for a total of $57,500 dollars. (Exhibit A)
5. The defendant made the first payment and then left the plaintiff’s discord server and stopped communicating and paying the loan. (Exhibit A)
6. The defendant left the discord server. (Exhibit B)
7. The defendant would only accept messages from friends in discord, barring the plaintiff’s ability to communicate with them. (Exhibit C)
8. A demand letter was sent by Prodigium and was promptly ignored. (Exhibit D).

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. In creating the loan, the plaintiff established a reasonable belief on the promise of the defendant to pay the plaintiff their consideration. Therefore promissory estoppel may be utilized to keep the defendant to their promise and enforce the terms. (CLF Act, Section 9, subsection 9 and 10),

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. Promissory estoppel forcing the defendant to immediately remit all missed payments starting from 08/12/22 for a total of $32,343.75.
2. Promissory estoppel enforcing the terms of the contract for continued weekly payments until the debts are satisfied.
3. $12,500 dollars of legal fees be awarded to the plaintiff for legal expenses.

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 7th day of October, 2022.

Exhibit D is too big, uploading to Imgur:

https://imgur.com/a/Wtm9IPe

 

[Matthew100x]

 

[dygyee]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS
The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of the JP Morgan v. MightyMonkey576 [2022] FCR 80. 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.​

 

[dygyee]

Verdict

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
JP Morgan v. MightyMonkey576 [2022] FCR 80

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The Plaintiff gave a $50,000 loan to the Defendant which was to be paid back just under $3,600 per week for 4 months, totaling $57,000 paid back to the Plaintiff.
2. The Defendant made 1 payment before cutting communication with the Plaintiff, and since then has failed to make any payments.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. The Defendant has failed to appear before the court.

III. THE COURT OPINION
1. The facts are backed up by the evidence, and it is clear that a contract was agreed upon by both parties.
2. The Defendant has failed to hold up their end of the agreement, and therefore the Plaintiff is entitled to all of their money back, plus whatever interest they would've gotten.

IV. DECISION
1. I hereby rule in favor of the Plaintiff, and have determined that they will be getting all of their money back now. I hereby order the DOJ to fine MightyMonkey576 $53,906.25, and to unfine the Plaintiff the same amount.

The Federal Court thanks all involved.