Lawsuit: Adjourned Redmont Bar Association (RBA) v. Zanokuhle [2024] FCR 104

Status
Not open for further replies.
Matthew100x

Matthew100x

Citizen
Redmont Bar Assoc.
Supporter
4th Anniversary Impeached Order of Redmont 3rd Anniversary
Matthew100x
Matthew100x
attorney
Joined
Jul 14, 2020
Messages
534
Emergency Injunctions are made with the goal of preventing harm (see Lawsuit: Adjourned - The Commonwealth v. Bardiya_King [2023] SCR 23). Per the Act of Congress - Judiciary Act, "(b) Emergency - Injunctions that are issued before the court has tried a case to prevent harm. If the applicant fails to file a lawsuit within 4 hours of requesting an emergency injunction the order will be null and void." There is an ongoing situation that a pro se litigant by the name of Zanokuhle, whom would be the defendant in this case, is spamming district court cases and causing harm to the judiciary. The boundary of legal practice is managed by the RBA (see generally Act of Congress - Super Modern Legal Board Act). While the disbarment process typically must go through a lengthy process, the RBA wishes to assert it's power to regulate the practice of law and prevent abuse by this pro se litigant with powers that would exist outside of the realm of disbarment.

As such, we are asking for an emergency injunction barring the defendant from posting any additional cases in any court without the assistance of a lawyer. We will file the full case within the next 4 hours.
 
Granted. The defendant, Zanokuhle, is hereby barred from filing any future cases unless represented by an attorney for now.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Redmont Bar Association (Lead Attorney RBA Chairman Matthew100x)
Plaintiff

v.

Zanokuhle
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

The plaintiff regulates the field of law via the Act of Congress - Super Modern Legal Board Act. Under most ordinary instances, a person is allowed to represent themselves, especially in the district court (see Creating a Lawsuit in the District Court). Indeed, even under the Court rules, there are District Court small claims exceptions specifically designed for citizens (see Information - Court Rules and Procedures). However, defendant created multiple frivolous lawsuits that have disrupted the judiciary (see Lawsuit: Dismissed - Zanokuhle Vs. AlexanderLove [2024] DCR 19, Lawsuit: Dismissed - Zanokuhle Vs. AlexanderLove [2024] DCR 19, Lawsuit: Dismissed - Zanokuhle vs. The Government of Rev [2024] DCR21, et al.) causing stress to the judiciary. Such litigation abuse would normally be protected by the plaintiff via the disbarment process against an unduly lawyer. However, in such a position as this where the defendant is pro se, the plaintiff wishes to assert its power.

According to the Act of Congress - Super Modern Legal Board Act, “Only persons qualified by the Redmont Bar Association may practice law and be certified as a lawyer… one of three qualifications: solicitor, barrister, or attorney.” As the defendant is pro se and not a lawyer, Section 9(3) does not come into play. Instead, we wish to enforce the boundaries of the practice of law by insisting that the defendant be required to have a lawyer to post any additional cases for a period of time.


I. PARTIES
1. Redmont Bar Association
2. Zanokuhle

II. FACTS
1. Defendant said that they were going to begin suing people. (Exhibit A)
2. Defendant was warned by plaintiff’s chairperson not to sue. (Exhibit B)
3. Defendant was warned again by plaintiff’s chairperson not to create frivolous lawsuits. (Exhibit C)
4. Defendant posted their first case (see Lawsuit: Dismissed - Zanokuhle Vs. AlexanderLove [2024] DCR 19)
5. Defendant was told by plaintiff’s chairperson that they would be charged with creating a frivolous case and that they should not post any additional cases (Exhibit D).
6. Defendant begins to post more cases in spite of the warnings (see Case Archive, generally [2025] DCR 19 - [2024] DCR 25)
7. Defendant receives the following charges (as of the posting of this complaint): 5 charges of filing a frivolous case; 1 charge of fraud; and 1 charge of perjury.
8. Under normal circumstances, if the defendant were a lawyer, they’d be eligible for disbarment under section 9 of the Super Modern Legal Board Act (and subsequent edits) (see Act of Congress - Super Modern Legal Board Act).
10. Since the defendant is pro se, they would generally be barred from posting cases unless it was inside of the district court.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Defendant’s excessive abuse of the Judiciary constitutes exceptional circumstances where a bar preventing them from posting cases is allowable by injunction via Section 13 of the Constitution “Judicial Power - Judicial power is vested in the court” (see Government - Constitution). Instead requiring that a lawyer be necessary for the defendant to adjudicate proper fairness within the judiciary.
2. Plaintiff’s power to regulate the practice of law allows them to file an injunction preventing the defendant from posting clearly frivolous cases that would otherwise disbar a regular lawyer (see Act of Congress - Super Modern Legal Board Act).

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. A two month injunction from the practice of law.

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 15th day of July 2024.

Exhibit A & B
1721096427642.png

Exhibit C
1721096540040.png

Exhibit D
1721096625975.png
 
Your honor,

Defendant has pleaded guilt in #legal of the DemocracyCraft Discord Server.

1721096708043.png
 
Seal_Judiciary.png


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

@Zanokuhle is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case ofRedmont Bar Association (RBA) v. Zanokuhle. Failure to appear within 72 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

Both parties should make themselves aware of the Court Rules and Procedures , including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

Redmont Bar Association
Prosecution

v.

Zanokuhle
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The Defendant affirms they said that they were going to begin suing people. (Exhibit A)
2. The Defendant affirms that they were warned by plaintiff’s chairperson not to sue. (Exhibit B)
3. The Defendant affirms they were warned again by plaintiff’s chairperson not to create frivolous lawsuits. (Exhibit C)
4. The Defendant affirms they posted their first case (see Lawsuit: Dismissed - Zanokuhle Vs. AlexanderLove [2024] DCR 19)
5. The Defendant affirms they were told by plaintiff’s chairperson that they would be charged with creating a frivolous case and that they should not post any additional cases (Exhibit D).
6. The Defendant affirms they began to post more cases in spite of the warnings (see Case Archive, generally [2025] DCR 19 - [2024] DCR 25)
7. The Defendant affirms they received the following charges (as of the posting of this complaint): 5 charges of filing a frivolous case; 1 charge of fraud; and 1 charge of perjury.
8. The Defendant affirms that Under normal circumstances, if the defendant were a lawyer, they’d be eligible for disbarment under section 9 of the Super Modern Legal Board Act (and subsequent edits) (see Act of Congress - Super Modern Legal Board Act).


II. DEFENSES
1. We have no defense. Zanokuhle knows that what he did was wrong and is willing to take the punishment for his actions.


1721151933731.png

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 16th day of July 2024.
 
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

There is no need to argue. We affirmed all the facts and just want this case to be over. We arent fighting anything alleged in this case. Faster this case finishes the faster Zanokuhle can serve their disbarrment
 
The RBA has 24 hours to respond to the motion.
 
The plaintiff agrees with the motion for summary judgment.
 
With the sole exception that there is an understanding that this is not a disbarment, this is a request for an injunction to prevent the defendant from posting cases without the assistance of a lawyer.
 
Court is in recess pending verdict.
 

Verdict


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT

Redmont Bar Association (RBA) v. Zanokuhle [2024] FCR 104

I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The Plaintiff, the Redmont Bar Association (RBA), contends that the Defendant, Zanokuhle, has engaged in a pattern of filing frivolous lawsuits, which disrupts the judiciary and causes undue stress.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. The Defendant, Zanokuhle, acknowledges the filing of multiple lawsuits but argues that there was no malicious intent and that the lawsuits were attempts to seek redress for perceived grievances. The Defendant contends that the actions were not intended to abuse the judicial system, although they now recognize the error in judgment and accept responsibility for the consequences.

III. THE COURT OPINION

  1. This ruling is based on the information presented by the parties and matters commonly known to the public.
  2. The Redmont Bar Association (RBA) is granted its power to regulate the practice of lawyers through the Super Modern Legal Board Act. Since the Defendant is not a practicing lawyer, it is difficult for the plaintiff to exercise its regulatory power directly. However, the RBA may sue an individual for abuse of the legal system and seek a court order to prevent further interference with the judicial branch.
  3. The Defendant has clearly admitted to filing frivolous lawsuits in an attempt to mock the DCR. Whether done as a joke or without serious intent, this behavior is no excuse for placing undue stress on the Judicial Branch or the DCR.

IV. DECISION
In the matter of FCR 104, I rule in favor of the Plaintiff with a modified prayer for relief.
  1. The Defendant is barred from filing lawsuits themselves for one month or until they pass all three legal exams. It is important to note that the Defendant may still represent themselves if they are sued or prosecuted, and they have the right to a public defender. They may also hire a practicing attorney to file lawsuits on their behalf.

The Federal Court thanks all involved.



 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top