Lawsuit: Dismissed northeastprince v. Golden Globe, Inc. [2021] FCR 30

[northeastprince]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


northeastprince
Plaintiff

v.

Golden Globe, Inc.
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

I was gambling at the Golden Globe casino. Then I looked up at the signs. I realized that the odds were there, but they weren't displayed as actual odds. They were letters. It was a relative system, which didn't help me or my fellow gamblers at all.

I. PARTIES
1. northeastprince
2. Golden Globe, Inc.

II. FACTS
1. Plaintiff (northeastprince) entered Defendant (Golden Globe, Inc.)'s casino, having an objective of gambling money.
2. Plaintiff began gambling and losing unreasonable amounts of money.
3. Plaintiff noticed betting odds displayed incorrectly.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Casino betting odds displayed incorrectly, in violation of DCC §10.4 (Exhibit A - D)

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $3,000 in damages.
2. $250 in legal fees.
3. A display of proper odds on the automated betting machines.

Spoiler: Exhibit A

Spoiler: Exhibit B

Spoiler: Exhibit C

Spoiler: Exhibit D

Witnesses:
- Galavance

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 25th day of March, 2021

 

[Matt]

If the plaintiff could please confirm, Galavance is the owner of Golden Globe Inc.? Thank you

 

[northeastprince]

If the plaintiff could please confirm, Galavance is the owner of Golden Globe Inc.? Thank you

That is correct, Your Honor.

 

[Matt]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
SUMMONS
The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of northeastprince v Golden Globe Inc.. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff.​

 

[Galavance]

Yup

 

[Matt]

When practicable, could you please provide a better photo of the odds sign? I.e. where it is in relation to the rest of the room.

If you could submit an 'answer to civil complaint' in the next 48 hours I'd appreciate it. The template can be found in the 'Creating a lawsuit' page.

 

[northeastprince]

Your Honor, ElementPenguin will be joining me as co-counselor.

 

[northeastprince]

Your Honor, I have uncovered some critical new facts based on the pictures Galavance sent and updates to the situation. Permission to update The Court on the case?

 

[Matt]

Your Honor, I have uncovered some critical new facts based on the pictures Galavance sent and updates to the situation. Permission to update The Court on the case?

Please wait until the defendant has posted his full submission, thank you!

 

[Dusty_3]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

northeastprince
Plaintiff

v.

Galavance (Prodigium and Partners at Law representing)
Defendant

Case no:

MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant move that the complaint, in this case, be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:
1. For the courts to not dismiss this case would be a violation of the separation of powers due to the law specifically vesting the power to regulate these casinos in the DEC's jurisdiction. The law is very specific, it does not give citizens any ability to sue for damages, however, states that the DEC must investigate and perform inspections on their own accord.

The defence moves to have this case dismissed and deemed frivolous. We request that the plaintiff compensates my client's legal fees in the amount of $500.

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 26th day of March 2021

 

[Matt]

The law in question does state that casinos may be inspected by the DEC, but also states that inspections are not mandated. I cannot find the clause that suggests the DEC has sole jurisdiction over this civil matter. Could the defence please clarify that assertion?

Your Honor, I have uncovered some critical new facts based on the pictures Galavance sent and updates to the situation. Permission to update The Court on the case?

If the new facts pertain to the subject matter of the motion to dismiss, please make a submission explaining these new facts. If the new facts do not relate to the matters presented in the motion to dismiss, please refrain from submitting them yet.

 

[Dusty_3]

Your Honour,
1. Allow me to clarify:

As you see in these photos, the court does not have jurisdiction in "Failure to Display Odds". That power is in the hands of the executive departments.
2. Not only that but the defendant is suing for damages, this isn't civil law, I should see a Prosecutor handling this if it even became a court issue.
3. Furthermore, the clause you say that inspectors are not "mandated" to check up on casino's, which means that our citizens and judges pertain the ability to determine whether or not the machine displays the correct odds, is flawed. In its context "Mandated" is not referring to the courts being able to determine whether or not the casinos were breaking the regulation, but it's referring to the fact that they won't be forcing inspectors to inspect casino's every day. This clause defends them from lawsuits where the plaintiff would suggest that the DEC is not doing its job/duty to regulate these casinos.

4. As the constitution states, the Executive branch executes the laws written by Congress, and the judiciary interprets the laws. as part of the executive branch, the DEC has jurisdiction over this matter therefore this should be raised with the DEC through a ticket and it is up to them to decide the legality of the casino. If they consider the casino to be breaking the law, then the citizen should claim damages. This law specifically does not include the ability for this law to be decided in the courts, it is decided by the executive branch.

That's all I wish to clarify. This law is specific in leaving the power to the DEC/DOJ.
Thank you, your honour.

 

[northeastprince]

Your Honor, I'm dropping the case. Thank you for your time.

 

[Matt]

Your Honor, I'm dropping the case. Thank you for your time.

Verdict

Due to a lack of support for continuance, this case is hereby dismissed.