Lawsuit: Adjourned Lynx v. AryaBroz [2022] FCR 26

[Freeze_Line]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Lynx
Plaintiff

v.

AryaBroz
Defendant


COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
The Defendant was hired in Lynx as a lawyer but later left the discord server claiming that he quit dc. Since the Defendant was the only lawyer in Lynx, the company remained without a legal hand. The contract also mentioned that the Defendant wasn't allowed to quit the company for 2 months after signing the contract.

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF


I. PARTIES
1. Freeze_Line - Legal Counsel
2. Lynx - Plaintiff (Lovely Law Firm Representing)
3. AryaBroz - Defendant

II. FACTS
1. The Defendant signed a hiring contract stating that he wasn't allowed to quit Lynx or Lynx's Discord server during the first 2 months in real life.
2. The Defendant only spent 3-4 days in the company before he quit.
3. The Defendant was also the only legal hand Lynx had which made the Defendant very important.
4. The Defendant was in the middle of a case when we quit, creating great troubles for Lynx.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The contract clearly states that the worker can be sued for charges up to $40,000 if the worker quits the company within two months in real life. The Defendant knew it perfectly but still decided to quit the company.
2. The Defendant had a very important role in the company and was the only legal hand inside it. Therefore the Defendant is getting sued for the maximum charge that was stated in the contract.
3. As the evidence below shows, the Defendant clearly stated that he was quitting dc and left the Lynx Discord server shortly after. The Defendant's name color is white because he lost all of his roles inside the server when he left.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $40,000 to Lynx for making it vulnerable to lawsuits and breaking the contract.
2. $4,000 in legal fees.

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 7 day of April 2022

 

[Wuutie]

WRIT OF SUMMONS

The Defendant,
@aryabroz , is required to appear before the court in the case of Lynx v. AryaBroz
. 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.​

 

[Bubblybo]

Your honor, the time has exceeded, what happens now? Is the player given a public defender or default judgement?

 

[Wuutie]

The RBA will now appoint a public defender. And catch up to his best capabilities.

 

[Claxx77]

I have been appointed by Redmont Bar Association as Public Defender to represent bibsfi4a (AryaBroz). I'm requesting 24 hours extension to prepare.

 

[Wuutie]

Giving you 24 hours from now so more than 2 days to get this case up to your speed.

 

[Claxx77]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS


The defense move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

1. bibsfi4a claims that he left the lynx server because BubblyBo told “You are underage and you must leave the server”. After that, BubblyBo deleted all messages to remove every proof.

2. bibsfi4a didn’t only leave the lynx server, he also left DemocracyCraft. So there isn’t any point in suing someone who is not affiliated with DemocracyCraft anymore.

3. The contract must be terminated because bibsfi4a left DemocracyCraft and the contract doesn’t mean anything when someone leaves the server.


DATED: 16/04/2022

 

[Wuutie]

The Plaintiff may present a rebuttal within 24 hours.

 

[Freeze_Line]

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

1. The Defendant claims that BubblyBo deleted their messages in order to hide evidence, but there is nothing that can back that up. Firstly, the Defendant couldn't provide any sort of proof to ensure that the accusations given by the Defendant were true. Secondly, if the Defendant really saw the plaintiff send such messages, a logical thing would be to take a screenshot which the Defendant never did. The Defendant gave such an easy accusation without providing anything to strengthen it. Since there is nothing that can prove that the plaintiff deleted their messages, the accusation should not be considered valid.

2. Even though the Defendant left the company and DemocracyCraft, the contract is still operational and ongoing for a 2 irl month period. That means that the Defendant is still affiliated with the company. The Defendant also knew that they would face charges up to $40,000 if they quit the company before the contract ended. By leaving DemocracyCraft and the company, the Defendant probably thought that they could avoid the contract, not only that but the Defendant was also assigned to a case during that time when they left. The Defendant left the company with some big problems and vulnerabilities since the Defendant was the only lawyer inside the company.

3. No matter if the Defendant left DemocracyCraft or not, the contract is still valid. By signing the contract, the Defendant agreed to work for lynx for 2 irl months, and the contract couldn't be terminated during that time. The Defendant could only leave the company when the contract expired. Since the Defendant left the company before the contract expired, the plaintiff has full rights to sue the Defendant.

4. The motion to dismiss should be dismissed since no frivolities or inaccuracies have been alleged. The defendant was making their own arguments instead of pointing out frivolities.

DATED: This 17 day of April 2022

 

[Wuutie]

Thank you all, since I had some health issues (I was under surgery and in Intensive care for some days) I will be proceeding with the case. The motion will be denied and we can move on to the Opening Statement of the Plaintiff. Please present one within 48 hours. Thank you.

 

[Bubblybo]

Your honour, may I get a 48 Hour extension?

 

[Freeze_Line]

Your honor, there is no need for that.

 

[Freeze_Line]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

The facts will show that:
- The Defendant was hired as a lawyer at Lynx
- The Defendant later decided to quit.
- The contract stated that if the Defendant left Lynx's Discord server, they would face charges up to $40,000.
- The defendant was also a part of a case during the time they decided to leave, causing serious impacts to Lynx.
- Players who have quit DemocracyCraft can still be sued.
- There is no evidence of the Defendant being forced to leave the server.

 

[Wuutie]

Okay, the Defendant may present his.

 

[Claxx77]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT


First of all, I want to mention that Bibsfi4a is not underage.

Psypio made an announcement and told everyone Bibsfi4a is underage and excluded from the party and banned from the discord server. Then he talked with BubblyBo. BubblyBo threatened him to leave the discord. After that Bibsfi4a left the discord server and DemocracyCraft because BubblyBo was about to ban him because of the underage rumour.

So in this situation, Bibsfi4a is not guilty and there is no point of sue him. I tried to contact Psypio to talk about his communication with BubblyBo but he is not responding to my messages.


Proofs:

 

[Wuutie]

I would like to tell you that all parties next time post within 48 hours. Thank you. Please provide a list of witnesses you want to call in this case.

 

[Freeze_Line]

Your honor, the plaintiff has no witnesses to call.

 

[Claxx77]

Your honour, I apologise for the late response. The defendant has no witnesses to call.

 

[Wuutie]

Thank you both, we can move on to closing statements. The Plaintiff may provide his closing statement.

 

[Freeze_Line]

Your honor, may I provide some additional evidence in the closing statement?

 

[Wuutie]

I approve.

 

[Freeze_Line]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

The current facts exhibit that:
- The defendant left Lynx’s discord server.
- There is no proof that can clarify why the defendant left Lynx.
- The defendant left Lynx in the middle of a case, which caused Lynx trouble.
- Lynx wouldn't even consider banning the defendant due to their age if that was the case.
- There is no evidence that can point towards the plaintiff threatening to ban the defendant.
- The audit log from that day shows that the plaintiff didn't ban the defendant and that it could only mean that the defendant left on their own.
- The defendant's age wasn't mentioned in BubblyBo's dm's with Psypio during the day the defendant quit.

Since the defendant left on their own, the contract was broken. And the defendant is therefore sued for the breach of contract.

The rumor about the defendant's age wasn't in the concern of Lynx. Therefore, the plaintiff had no intention to ban the defendant for their age. After undergoing troubles made by the defendant after leaving Lynx in the middle of a case, the plaintiff had full rights to sue the defendant as the contract was broken, and extra difficulties were made.

I would also like to point out that the standard of proof is on the balance of the probabilities.

Spoiler: The Additional Evidence

 

[Claxx77]

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CLOSING STATEMENT

The defendant continues to claim these facts:

- Psypio started an underage rumour about Bibsfi4a.
- Psypio talked with Bubblybo about this situation.
- Defendant tried to contact Psypio but he is not responded to the defendant’s messages.
- Bibsfi4a was threatened to leave the server because of the underage rumour.
- Bibsfi4a left the discord server because Bubblybo was about to ban you because of an underage rumour.

The defendant wants to make some comments about the latest proofs.
First of all, in the first proof, we can’t see the last communication that was made between Bubblybo and Bibsfi4a. We can only see the start of the communication.

Also, the defendant did not claim that Bubblybo banned Bibsfi4a. The defendant claimed that Bibsfi4a was threatened by Bubblybo to leave the server, otherwise, bubblybo was going to ban him.


As the defendant claimed before, the defendant tried to contact Psypio to make everything clear but he did not answer our messages.

In this situation, Bibsfi4a has been aggrieved and there is no point in suing. Also suing him is not the correct way to solve this situation.


One more thing, Bibsfi4a wants to leave this comment about this case;

Your honour, this is a case of harassment and toxicity. I believe it's more of an IRL issue and should be left up to the admins and staff to handle with.

 

[Wuutie]

Thank you both, I will need some time to write my verdict. I will get back to you as soon as possible.

 

[Wuutie]

Verdict

IN THE COURT OF COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT

Case No. [2022] FCR 26.

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
- There was a contract established between the Plaintiff, Lynx, and the Defendant, AryaBroz. The contract specified that the Defendant could not leave the company for the first 2 months when the contract was signed. The Defendant failed to do so and is therefore in violation of the contract.
- The Timing of it all was difficult as well since the company was sued and therefore had trouble in the Court.
- The Plaintiff never threatened to ban the player from the discord and the company so the contract is still legal.
- The Defendant's age did not matter to the Plaintiff.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
- There was a rumor started by Psypio over the fact that the Defendant would be "underage". Psypio went to BubblyBo about this "underage" claim.
- The Defendant went to Psypio to explain the situation but was ignored by him.
- Bibsfi4a has been aggrieved and there is no point in suing. Also suing him is not the correct way to solve this situation.

III. COURT'S OPINION
- A contract has been established between The Plaintiff and the Defendant. The contract indeed specified if the Defendant left the server the Defendant would be in violation of it.
- The Plaintiff proved that the Defendant left the server and so was in violation of the contract.
- The Defendant failed to prove that he indeed was threatened by the Plaintiff on leaving the server.
- The whole environment was in my professional opinion very toxic and could be looked into by the Staff and recommended it. Someone got canceled by his age which is discrimination. I would suggest the Defendant go to staff.
- Because of this situation a minimal punishment would be in place.

IV. VERDICT

The Court hereby rules in favor of the Plaintiff.

The Court orders the following:
- A fine of $5000 paid to the Plaintiff by the Defendant

Please read the full verdict for the reasoning behind the following.

I would like to thank every party for the time and effort put into this case.