Alexander P. Love
Citizen
Justice Department
Supporter
Popular in the Polls
Legal Eagle
Statesman
Order of Redmont
AlexanderLove
Attorney
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2021
- Messages
- 1,380
- Thread Author
- #1
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION
Morgan, Sheraton, & Co. (Represented by Dragon Law Firm)
Plaintiff
v.
The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
On February 10th, 2024, an eviction auction for s051 commenced. The details of this auction simply were a starting bid of $25,230, a minimum increment of $500, and an expiration time of 24 hours after the final bid. With those parameters, several bids were placed over the course of eight days, culminating in an auction pause. After that auction pause, it was suddenly announced that many bids by the plaintiff were invalidated, resulting in a win for Dragons1ayer343. This win, however, was not a legal one.
I. PARTIES
1. Morgan, Sheraton, & Co. (Plaintiff, Referred to as MSC)
2. Nexalin (Agent of MSC)
3. Department of Construction and Transportation (Tortfeasor)
4. The Commonwealth of Redmont (Defendant)
5. Nacholebraa (Agent of the DCT)
6. ko531 (Auctioneer)
II. FACTS
1. On February 10th, 2024, an eviction auction for s051 commenced. The details of this auction simply were a starting bid of $25,230, a minimum increment of $500, and an expiration time of 24 hours after the final bid (Exhibit A).
2. On February 18th, 2024 at 12:12PM EST, Dragons1ayer343 posted a bid of "499,500" (Exhibit B).
3. On February 18th, 2024 at 12:18PM EST, Nacholebraa paused the auction under allegations of "false bids." This pause would stop the clock, as it prevented new bids and paused all aspects of the auction (Exhibit B).
4. On February 19th, 2024 at 1:49PM EST, Nacholebraa unexpectedly and prematurely announced the conclusion of the auction, finding a winner when the auction actually was not yet over (Exhibit C).
5. The "winning" bid was placed by Dragons1ayer343 on February 18th, 2024 at 12:26AM EST, less than 12 hours before the auction was paused (link) (Exhibit D), valued at "480,000 ( bank)".
6. Nexalin, on behalf of MSC, posted a bid of "$50,500" on February 10th, 2024 at 4:03PM EST, the only bid in the entire auction to contain a dollar sign or any terminology denoting units (Exhibits E, F, and G).
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Foundation of Contract Law (link) stipulates that an offer, such as a bid in an auction for which the consideration is a property, may not be ambiguous per Section 6.2: "It cannot be vague or ambiguous". Bids that do not specify units are not valid offers and thus should be disregarded per precedent established in BubblyBo v. MysticPhunky (link). Additionally, the original terms of the auction stipulate its values in dollars, only offers that bid in dollars are acceptable (IE one cannot legally bid 30,000 gold ingots in this auction). Since the bid of $50,500 stated dollars as the units via the dollar sign and it was the only bid that did so, it should be treated as the winning bid. No other valid offers, and therefore bids, were made within 24 hours after the bid of $50,500. Per the terms of the auction, MSC should be awarded the property s051 in exchange for $50,500.
2. After the pause was lifted, there should have been 12 hours and eight minutes left of bidding per the auction terms (24 hours after the final bid) if the "winning" bid really was the winning bid. The pause effectively stopped the clock and prevented more bids, so it should have also frozen the actual bidding time itself. Therefore, my client had the potential to place a valid and winning bid after the pause which was expressly denied. This breaches fairness of the auction and constitutes breach of contract. The term governing duration was not honored by the Commonwealth, constituting a negligent breach leading to civil damages.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. IF CLAIM FOR RELIEF 1 IS ACCEPTED:
1a. The property s051 be transferred from the defendant to the plaintiff immediately.
1b. $50,500 to be transferred from the plaintiff to the defendant in a reasonable timeframe.
2. IF CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2, BUT NOT 1, IS ACCEPTED:
2a. The auction to immediately be resumed for an additional 12 hours and 8 minutes, pinging all people who previously placed a bid (valid or not) to allow for fair bidding.
3. IF EITHER CLAIM IS ACCEPTED:
3a. 20% of the monetary winnings in this case in the form of legal fees awarded to Dragon Law Firm.
3b. Given the massive space within and the plaintiff's plans for utilizing the building that have been hindered, $2,500 in opportunity cost daily from the 19th (if claim 1 is accepted, from the 12th) until the conclusion of this case.
3c. $100,000 in punitive damages for the outrageous, brash, and negligent conduct of the Department of Construction and Transportation. This breach of contract is a serious one, added to the fact there are technically TWO major holes in the conduct of the Department pointed out earlier.
V. EVIDENCE
VI. PRELIMINARY WITNESSES
1. Nexalin
2. Nacholebraa
3. Dragons1ayer343
4. ko531
VII. EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
Given the Department's desire to hastily transfer this property, an emergency faces us. Dragons1ayer343 is not the rightful owner of the property and could cause irreversible damage to the property by then selling it, modifying it, or otherwise altering the integrity of the property in its current form. Therefore, I motion to freeze the property and for the Court to order the DCT to hold on to the property without modifying it in any way for the duration of this case, and to also reverse any bidding transactions that have already occurred.
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 19th day of February 2024
CIVIL ACTION
Morgan, Sheraton, & Co. (Represented by Dragon Law Firm)
Plaintiff
v.
The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant
COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:
On February 10th, 2024, an eviction auction for s051 commenced. The details of this auction simply were a starting bid of $25,230, a minimum increment of $500, and an expiration time of 24 hours after the final bid. With those parameters, several bids were placed over the course of eight days, culminating in an auction pause. After that auction pause, it was suddenly announced that many bids by the plaintiff were invalidated, resulting in a win for Dragons1ayer343. This win, however, was not a legal one.
I. PARTIES
1. Morgan, Sheraton, & Co. (Plaintiff, Referred to as MSC)
2. Nexalin (Agent of MSC)
3. Department of Construction and Transportation (Tortfeasor)
4. The Commonwealth of Redmont (Defendant)
5. Nacholebraa (Agent of the DCT)
6. ko531 (Auctioneer)
II. FACTS
1. On February 10th, 2024, an eviction auction for s051 commenced. The details of this auction simply were a starting bid of $25,230, a minimum increment of $500, and an expiration time of 24 hours after the final bid (Exhibit A).
2. On February 18th, 2024 at 12:12PM EST, Dragons1ayer343 posted a bid of "499,500" (Exhibit B).
3. On February 18th, 2024 at 12:18PM EST, Nacholebraa paused the auction under allegations of "false bids." This pause would stop the clock, as it prevented new bids and paused all aspects of the auction (Exhibit B).
4. On February 19th, 2024 at 1:49PM EST, Nacholebraa unexpectedly and prematurely announced the conclusion of the auction, finding a winner when the auction actually was not yet over (Exhibit C).
5. The "winning" bid was placed by Dragons1ayer343 on February 18th, 2024 at 12:26AM EST, less than 12 hours before the auction was paused (link) (Exhibit D), valued at "480,000 ( bank)".
6. Nexalin, on behalf of MSC, posted a bid of "$50,500" on February 10th, 2024 at 4:03PM EST, the only bid in the entire auction to contain a dollar sign or any terminology denoting units (Exhibits E, F, and G).
III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Foundation of Contract Law (link) stipulates that an offer, such as a bid in an auction for which the consideration is a property, may not be ambiguous per Section 6.2: "It cannot be vague or ambiguous". Bids that do not specify units are not valid offers and thus should be disregarded per precedent established in BubblyBo v. MysticPhunky (link). Additionally, the original terms of the auction stipulate its values in dollars, only offers that bid in dollars are acceptable (IE one cannot legally bid 30,000 gold ingots in this auction). Since the bid of $50,500 stated dollars as the units via the dollar sign and it was the only bid that did so, it should be treated as the winning bid. No other valid offers, and therefore bids, were made within 24 hours after the bid of $50,500. Per the terms of the auction, MSC should be awarded the property s051 in exchange for $50,500.
2. After the pause was lifted, there should have been 12 hours and eight minutes left of bidding per the auction terms (24 hours after the final bid) if the "winning" bid really was the winning bid. The pause effectively stopped the clock and prevented more bids, so it should have also frozen the actual bidding time itself. Therefore, my client had the potential to place a valid and winning bid after the pause which was expressly denied. This breaches fairness of the auction and constitutes breach of contract. The term governing duration was not honored by the Commonwealth, constituting a negligent breach leading to civil damages.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. IF CLAIM FOR RELIEF 1 IS ACCEPTED:
1a. The property s051 be transferred from the defendant to the plaintiff immediately.
1b. $50,500 to be transferred from the plaintiff to the defendant in a reasonable timeframe.
2. IF CLAIM FOR RELIEF 2, BUT NOT 1, IS ACCEPTED:
2a. The auction to immediately be resumed for an additional 12 hours and 8 minutes, pinging all people who previously placed a bid (valid or not) to allow for fair bidding.
3. IF EITHER CLAIM IS ACCEPTED:
3a. 20% of the monetary winnings in this case in the form of legal fees awarded to Dragon Law Firm.
3b. Given the massive space within and the plaintiff's plans for utilizing the building that have been hindered, $2,500 in opportunity cost daily from the 19th (if claim 1 is accepted, from the 12th) until the conclusion of this case.
3c. $100,000 in punitive damages for the outrageous, brash, and negligent conduct of the Department of Construction and Transportation. This breach of contract is a serious one, added to the fact there are technically TWO major holes in the conduct of the Department pointed out earlier.
V. EVIDENCE
VI. PRELIMINARY WITNESSES
1. Nexalin
2. Nacholebraa
3. Dragons1ayer343
4. ko531
VII. EMERGENCY INJUNCTION
Given the Department's desire to hastily transfer this property, an emergency faces us. Dragons1ayer343 is not the rightful owner of the property and could cause irreversible damage to the property by then selling it, modifying it, or otherwise altering the integrity of the property in its current form. Therefore, I motion to freeze the property and for the Court to order the DCT to hold on to the property without modifying it in any way for the duration of this case, and to also reverse any bidding transactions that have already occurred.
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 19th day of February 2024
