Lawsuit: Dismissed lawanoesepr v. Admin23 [2021] DCR 69

[lawanoesepr]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

CIVIL ACTION


lawanoesepr

Plaintiff


v.


Admin23

Defendant


COMPLAINT

The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows: After a long argument with my reputation being attacked. Many RBA board members now dislike me and some have been avoiding my law firm. I have been also financially hurt by these statements.


WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

After a long argument with my reputation being attacked. Many RBA board members now dislike me and some have been avoiding my law firm. I have been also financially hurt by these statements.



I. PARTIES

1. Admin23 (defendant)

2. lawanoesepr (plaintiff)


II. FACTS

1. The defendant kept slandering me as I was saying "I respect your opinion"

2. The defendant made a false statement

3. My reputation was in fact hurt by these statements.


III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. Slander



IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:

1. 100$ for slander

2. A public apology

3. 100$ for any clients that were prevented from coming to my law firm

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 30th day of October 2021

 

[dygyee]

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

The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of lawanoesepr v. Admin23. 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.​

 

[Admin23]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS



lawanoesepr
Plaintiff

v.

Admin23
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:



1. Fact 2 is incorrect as Defendant had screenshots to prove that Plaintiff had a lack of understanding of the definition of “advertisement”.

2. The one claim of relief that Plaintiff has furnished for the Court is not a claim, but rather a single word.

3. Plaintiff has almost certainly committed perjury as he has stated: “The defendant made a false statement” while Defendant has either stated an opinion, or a provable fact with screenshots, both of which Plaintiff knew of (as he included one of the screenshots sent by Defendant laying out how Plaintiff had not understood the definition of “advertisement”, which is at the bottom of Plaintiff’s 4th screenshot), and neither of which may be considered false statements or slander under the legal framework of the Commonwealth of Redmont.

4. This lawsuit is frivolous and has only been filed due to Plaintiff’s feelings being hurt and without any basis in law.

EVIDENCE
I hereby tender the following exhibits into evidence: (See attachments. They are screenshots from the RBA discord server and the Lovely Law Firm discord server.)


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 30th day of October, 2021.

 

[dygyee]

Does the plaintiff have a rebuttal?

 

[lawanoesepr]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS



lawanoesepr
Plaintiff

v.

Admin23
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:



1. A lack of understanding of one thing does not mean that he cannot do another thing successfully. I'd like to note that my message saying "not a ad" was obviously a joke. And the defendant has attacked me for a joke and damaged my reputation

2. My claim is the defendant has broken the law slander and has caused my lose of income through my law firm.

3. This was never an opinion. Perjury has not been committed. It is not true as the Office of The attorney general has strict requirements that I have met. I have also fought quite a few cases. I have not broken the ethical doctorine. This all proves that the defendant statement is false.

4. This lawsuit has been filed under financial loss

5. The defendant has presented new facts. The motion to dismiss should be denied on this ground.




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.

 

[dygyee]

I will be rejecting the motion to dismiss. We will now move on to opening statements first from the plaintiff then from the defendant. lawanoesepr you have 48 hours from now to provide your opening statement.

 

[lawanoesepr]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

OPENING STATEMENT


1. The defendant has harmed my personal reputation and my law firms reputation with false statements.

2. I have lost a couple clients due to these statements.

3. The defendant has no proof of me being a bad lawyer other than a advertisement encouraging people to join the office of the attorney general and me jokingly saying it wasn't a advertisement. The defendant proceeded to tell the people in the server that I did not know what advertisement means and claiming I was a bad lawyer

4. He proceeded to take this to the RBA discord effectively ruining my reputation within the legal community

REQUEST FOR EMERGENCY INJUCTION
Due to the crippling reputation of the plaintiff and slanderous remarks made by the defendant The plaintiff asks for a emergency injunction to order the defendant to refrain from making slanderous remarks about the plaintiff until a verdict is reached.

 

[dygyee]

I'm rejecting the request for emergency injunction as the Plaintiff has not yet proven that the Defendant slandered him. However this court strongly encourages the defendant to not talk about the plaintiff during this case to prevent any potential slanderous remarks.

 

[dygyee]

The defendant now has 48 hours to present their opening statement.

 

[Admin23]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT


1. For Plaintiff to have any case, he must prove two things. The first being that the statements made by Defendant were purposely damaging the reputation of Plaintiff. The second being that those statements were untrue. Plaintiff has not specified any statements that were untrue or that were purposely damaging to Plaintiff’s reputation.

2. Opinions are not factual statements. Saying that I would hope Plaintiff does not have to write legal documents or go to trial can not be a false or true statement as far as proof goes. It is merely an opinion. I do not need proof to back up an opinion that Plaintiff wouldn’t be a quality lawyer. I am also not forcing or guiding people away from a law firm. I had no idea that Plaintiff had a law firm until after the statements were made.

3. Plaintiff had stated after the fact that his statements were “obviously a joke” yet it was not obvious to anyone present in the conversation. Plaintiff had many opportunities to make this clear and had not used any of those opportunities to make it clear.

4. Plaintiff had stated in their Motion to Dismiss: “Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed…”. Plaintiff is furnishing more proof that he produces low quality work which bolsters Defendant’s statement:
“I hope you don’t have to go to court or write any documents up then, for the sake of your clients”
as Plaintiff, who is representing himself, has done himself a disservice in this Court.

5. This is a use of the court system to punish people who have hurt Plaintiff’s feelings and that Plaintiff dislikes, and has shown in the past that he will do this. (e.g. Case 08-2021-22)

 

[lawanoesepr]

I object,
The defendant has just committed perjury by saying this " I had no idea that Plaintiff had a law firm until after the statements were made." Because you need a law firm to have a client I will also be submitting a screenshot. In the screenshot a random user says the name of my law firm in the chat.

 

[Admin23]

REBUTTAL

I thought Plaintiff was working for the Office of the Attorney General and that was who Plaintiff was advertising for. The Government gets sued a lot so I figured Plaintiff was hiring to compensate for more lawsuits or something along those lines. Plaintiff never specified he was hiring for a law firm in his advertisement, which unfortunately, has been deleted so I have no screenshot of the original advertisement.

 

[dygyee]

The plaintiff's evidence shows that Admin23 made a direct comment about the Plaintiffs law firm when he said "Obviously a bad one." This shows that Admin23 knew, and acknowledged that the Plaintiff had his own law firm.
I hereby order the DOJ to fine the Defendant, Admin23, $2000 for perjury.

 

[dygyee]

Would either party like to call a witness to testify in front of this court?

 

[lawanoesepr]

1. JoeGamer, Witness of conversation

 

[lawanoesepr]

The attorney general*

 

[dygyee]

Thank you. The Defendant has 24 hours to tell the court if he would like to call a witness.

 

[Admin23]

I would like to call AlexanderLove as my witness, your Honor.

 

[dygyee]

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

@JoeGamer and @Alexander P. Love are hereby summoned to the District Court of the Commonwealth of Redmont in Case No. 10-2021-30 as witnesses. They have 48 hours to appear. Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present. You will receive questions from the party that called you, and you may also be cross-examined.

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 of the Perjury Act.

Once the witnesses have been questioned, the opposing party will have the opportunity to cross-examine.​

 

[JoeGamer]

I am present your honor and have familiarized myself with the case

 

[dygyee]

Thank you JoeGamer. The Plaintiff has 48 hours to ask his question(s) to the witness, then the Defendant will have 48 hours to cross-examine the witness. After this witness has been questioned, assuming Alexander Love has appeared before the court, the Defendanet will have 48 hours to question Alexander Love, and the Plaintiff will have 48 hours to cross-examine him.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

I am present your honor and have familiarized myself with the case.

 

[lawanoesepr]

For JoeGamer:

1. When seeing the chat did you agree with the defendant based on your legal expertise

2. In your legal expierence as attorney general. Would I be considered a good or bad lawyer?

 

[Admin23]

I object to question two, your Honor. Improper character evidence as the question is an opinion and doesn’t add any factual value to the case.

 

[lawanoesepr]

As the person who hires prosecutor's. He needs know who is going to be a successful lawyer.

 

[lawanoesepr]

Let me also rephrase my question. Do you you see me as a successful lawyer?

 

[dygyee]

Objection sustained. Question 2 will be removed from the record as it is JoeGamer's opinion, and JoeGamer's opinion on whether lawanoesepr is a good lawyer or not isn't relevant to this case.
JoeGamer please answer only question 1. You have approximately 41 hours left to answer.

 

[JoeGamer]

1. I plea the fifth. I don't want to compromise my position within the RBA in holding votes, and giving statements to questions like these only weakens my integrity.

 

[dygyee]

I will ask you to answer the question as the 5th amendment states "No citizen is to be made to produce
self-incriminating evidence." No answer to this yes or no question will provide self-incriminating evidence. You have 24 hours from now to answer the question.

 

[JoeGamer]

Your honor,

With all due respect, answering this question could undermind my position as the Attorney General in the Redmont Bar Association. I hold the vote in the RBA, and giving an opinion in favor of the other could hurt my integrity of holding council elections. In the evidence provided, you can clearly see me joking around. Why? I don't want to get involved with situations against two lawyers, especially one where character or conduct are in question. Providing a response then could threaten my integrity to the board, and now could threaten my integrity. So, your honor, I respectfully pled my fifth amendment.

 

[dygyee]

After deliberation with some of my colleagues, I have decided that you must answer the question, however you may word your answer however you would like, and it doesn't have to be yes or no. You have 24 hours from now to post your answer.

 

[JoeGamer]

1. I believe the word of the defendant were not respectful, however, I do not inherently agree or disagree with their statement. I believe some of the conclusions that the defendant made in this discussion were fowl, but don't agree or disagree with them.

 

[dygyee]

Thank you. For the sake of time, if the defendant would like to, they may cross-examine JoeGamer, and list their questions for the second witness, Alexander Love, in the same post. They have 48 hours to do so.

 

[Admin23]

JoeGamer, could you tell, at the time, if they were posed as the personal opinion of Defendant or if they were posed as concrete facts? I would ask that you look at the evidence again to refresh your memory if needed.

I have one more question that I will ask depending on how JoeGamer answers, Your Honor.

 

[JoeGamer]

Your honor, I request Admin23 please rephrase their question. The question is very unclear, and cannot answer clearly to a question that I do not know what is being asked.

 

[dygyee]

Admin please rephrase your question to JoeGamer

 

[Admin23]

Apologies for the confusion.

JoeGamer, in your opinion, after reading Defendant’s statements, could you tell whether they were the personal opinion of Defendant, or if they were concrete facts?

 

[dygyee]

JoeGamer you have 48 hours from the time the question was asked to give your answer.

 

[JoeGamer]

I'll go over all the statements in the evidence to better answer the question.

The first point is a restating of lawanoesepr claim. The second is second point is stated as a fact, however, it's not evidently clear if this is an actual fact.

This is clearly an opinion of Admin23 as it does not hold any factual bases. While it may be a good thing, this is not a fact.

Another opinion of Admin23

This statement is also an opinion

 

[dygyee]

Admin you may now present your next question for JoeGamer or if you don’t have another question for JoeGamer, please list your questions for AlexanderLove. You have 48 hours to do so. After AlexanderLove is questioned by the Defendant he may be cross-examined by the Plaintiff.

 

[Admin23]

Thank you for your time, JoeGamer.

I have no further questions for JoeGamer, your Honor.

For AlexanderLove:

1) As you have been lawanoesepr’s former employer and has seen his quality of work, would you, as an experienced professional, recommend him to a client if they needed a lawyer and were looking for one?

2) You have been sued by lawanoesepr previously due to his termination as your employee, and you have seen his lawsuits against various different entities and people. How would you describe the general theme of his lawsuits?

 

[dygyee]

AlexanderLove has 48 hours from the time the question was asked to answer the question.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

1) Absolutely not. His writing no where near meets the cut for good quality work. He has also committed corporate espionage against the Lovely Law Firm in the past while double crossing the former Attorney General, as proven in lawanoesepr v. AlexanderLove. It’s clear he’s unethical as well.

2) His lawsuits seem to be intended to annoy or get revenge on those who tell the truth about him. I was sued for exposing him for corporate espionage. You now are being sued for exposing his lapse in understanding of an arguably easy definition.

 

[dygyee]

Would the Plaintiff like to cross-examine the current witness, if so, please ask your questions within 48 hours from the last post.

 

[dygyee]

Due to the Plaintiff not responding we will move on to closing statements. The Plaintiff has 48 hours from now to present their closing statement. After the Plaintiff presents their closing statement, the Defendant will have 48 hours to present theirs.

 

[Admin23]

Your Honor, could we speed up this trial? It seems that Plaintiff is dragging his feet to draw out this trial. He has not participated in this trial for thirteen days and he failed to say anything about cross examining AlexanderLove when he had the chance. He could have even said he has no questions, but he said nothing.

 

[dygyee]

The Plaintiff has less than 24 hours to post his closing statement. This is the last time the Plaintiff is required to post anything to the forums for this case, so it will no longer be an issue. However the Plaintiff's disrespect by not posting when he should have has been noted, and failure to post his closing statement in time will result in a contempt of court charge.

 

[Admin23]

Good morning, your Honor. I would like to note for the record that opposing counsel is not present in court today.

The Plaintiff sued me for slander due to my comments made in the Redmont Bar Association Discord server, specifically in the channel for lawyers. This is why we are here today.

For the purposes of this court, “slander” is defined as:
“A purposeful false statement of a player to cause damage to that player's reputation.”

The two parts needed to successfully prove slander are:
1. Purposefully stating something false; and

2. Intentionally stating that false thing to cause damage to the player’s reputation.

The Plaintiff has not proven either.

In the channel for lawyers, I stated:
“I hope you don’t have to go to court or write any documents up then, for the sake of your clients.”

To this, the Plaintiff responded:
“You are hurting my reputation and no it is not true. Thats slander [SIC]”

My statements concerning the Plaintiff’s competency were made after the Plaintiff entered into the Lovely Law Firm’s Discord server in order to advertise his competing legal services, and were based on the direct testimony of others who are qualified to assess his level of competency as an attorney, including his former employer who testified in this Court. His former employer stated in this court that the Plaintiff’s “writing no where near meets the cut for good quality work.”

In support of his former employer’s testimony, I would like to draw the court’s attention to the Plaintiff’s response to me, the Defendant, on the Discord server quoted above. The Court will notice multiple missing punctuation marks in his two sentence response. The missing punctuation marks include two commas, a period, and an apostrophe.

For my statements to be slander, the statements have to categorically untrue. My statements, calling into question his competency are further supported by the fact that he didn’t show up to court today, even when his reputation is on the line.

Furthermore, I did not intend to damage the Plaintiff’s reputation. If I had intended that, I would have made my statements in the RBA channel for non-lawyers because that’s where his clients would come from.

In summary, the Plaintiff falls short in making his case for slander on both points outlined above. Addressing point one, I, the Defendant, did not state something false. In order for the second point to hold relevance, point one has to be proven true first. However, for the sake of this Court, I would like to add that I, the Defendant, did not state my comments (truthful though they were) in order to cause damage to the Plaintiff’s reputation.
Lastly, I would like to petition the court to modify the Court’s legal definition of “slander”, as it would more appropriately be defined as “libel” due to its written, and not spoken, nature.

 

[dygyee]

This court hereby orders the DOJ to fine the Plaintiff $250 for contempt of court.
And, assuming that what the Defendant posted was his closing statement, this court will now go into recess and there will be a verdict shortly.

 

[dygyee]

Verdict

I will be dismissing this case with prejudice as the Plaintiff has failed to respond to the court in over 100 hours. As it's the Plaintiff's responsibility to pursue the case, his disregard in this court case will result in his claims being disregarded. I hope that the Plaintiff has respect for the court and all other parties involved in any future case that he's involved in.