Lawsuit: Adjourned The Lovely Law Firm v. babysoga [2023] FCR 87

[itsBlazeX]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

The Lovely Law Firm
Plaintiff

V.

babysoga
Defendant


COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

On October 16th, 2023, babysoga was hired as an associate at The Lovely Law Firm. However, little did I know that they were also working as a partner at The Redmont Law Firm. By doing so, babysoga breached the non-compete clause of their employment contract (Evidence A) with The Lovely Law Firm, and we deserve compensation as listed in babysoga’s employment contract.

I. PARTIES
1. itsBlazeX (Plaintiff, and owner of The Lovely Law Firm)
2. Babysoga (Defendant)
3. SumoMC (Witness)
4. xAntho_ny(Witness)


II. FACTS
1. As of October 16th, 2023, babysoga was employed as a partner at The Redmont Law Firm (Evidence B).
2. On October 16th, 2023, babysoga was hired as an associate at The Lovely Law Firm.
3. babysoga was employed at The Lovely Law Firm and The Redmont Law Firm at the same time (Evidence C).
4. On October 16th, 2023, babysoga signed and agreed to an employment contract (Evidence A).
5. babysoga violated the non-compete clause in the employment contract.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. In the contract that was signed by the Plaintiff and Defendant, it is stated “During the term of this agreement and for two weeks thereafter, the employee shall not engage, directly or indirectly, as an employee, officer, manager, partner, associate, paralegal, or owner of any law firm in competition with the employer or any of its subsidiaries.” By being an employee of The Redmont Law Firm when hired at The Lovely Law Firm, babysoga violated this clause of their contract.
2. The employment contract states “All disputes under this agreement are subject to legal action, and the prevailing party shall be entitled to legal fees not exceeding $7,500.” As The Lovely Law Firm is the prevailing party in this lawsuit, they are entitled to $7,500 in legal fees.
3. As stated in the employment contract, breach of contract shall result in “an extra breach fee equaling $10,000.” As babysoga breached the employment contract, The Lovely Law Firm is owed $10,000.


IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
1. $10,000 in liquidated damages
2. $2,000 in legal fees, instead of $7,500 as outlined in the employment contract, $2,000 is the maximum as it is 20% of the case value.

V. EVIDENCE

Evidence A

Evidence B

Evidence C

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 October 2023

 

[Dartanboy]

This case has been moved to the Federal Court, as according to the most recent, passed Constitutional Amendment that relates to court jurisdiction (Act of Congress - Increase District Court Requirement Act), the Federal Court has original jurisdiction for civil cases with a value of over $7500.

 

[Babysoga4real]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

CIVIL ACTION

babysoga Defendant

V.

The Lovely Law Firm Plaintiff

DEFENSE

I. INTRODUCTION

The Defendant, babysoga, responds to the Complaint filed by The Lovely Law Firm and offers the following defense to the claims raised against them, supplemented by new evidence presented by the Defendant.

II. PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS

The Defendant acknowledges that they were hired as an associate at The Lovely Law Firm on October 16, 2023, and that they were also employed at The Redmont Law Firm as a partner at the same time. The Defendant now submits evidence (provided in the link) that during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm, there were no emotional problems.

III. DEFENSE AGAINST CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

A. Non-Compete Clause

The Defendant asserts that the non-compete clause, as outlined in Evidence A, is overly restrictive and unenforceable under the laws of this Commonwealth. Non-compete agreements must be reasonable in scope, duration, and geographic limitation to be legally valid. The Defendant argues that they did not violate this clause and was hired for only one day, thus not competing with the Plaintiff.

B. Legal Fees and Extra Breach Fee

The Defendant disputes the claims for legal fees and an extra breach fee. The Defendant argues that the prevailing party clause and the extra breach fee, as outlined in Evidence A, should not apply in this case, as the Defendant did not breach the employment contract. The Defendant also contends that even if a breach is found, the terms set in the employment contract are excessive and contrary to public policy. The Defendant asks the court to declare these clauses unenforceable.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Defendant prays that the Court:

1. Dismisses the claims made by The Lovely Law Firm and declares the non-compete clause unenforceable.
2. Rules that the prevailing party clause and extra breach fee are inapplicable and unenforceable.
3. Provides any other relief the Court deems just and equitable.

V. NEW EVIDENCE

The Defendant presents the evidence (provided in the link) demonstrating that during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm, there were no emotional problems. This evidence should serve to support the Defendant's position that they were not in breach of the employment contract.

VI. CONCLUSION

The Defendant maintains that they did not breach the non-compete clause as alleged by The Lovely Law Firm and that the non-compete clause itself is unenforceable. The Defendant also argues that the legal fees and extra breach fee should not apply in this case. Furthermore, the Defendant submits new evidence showing that there were no emotional problems during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm.

The Defendant respectfully requests that the Court dismiss the Plaintiff's claims, declare the non-compete clause unenforceable, and grant any other appropriate relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

Respectfully submitted,

 

[Babysoga4real]

your honor i am on vacation so i will have an associate deal with this

 

[Babysoga4real]

(and i am on realy life vacation so i can´t talk here)

 

[Babysoga4real]

your honor i will have someone from the redmont law taking over

 

[Dartanboy]

BabySoga, please wait until the court issues a summons. This is your only warning not to speak out of turn.

 

[itsBlazeX]

MOTION TO STRIKE
The Defendant spoke out of turn, and prior to the Writ Of Summons. In addition, the Defendant submitted new evidence without being prompted by the Court. Therefore, the Plaintiff requests for the Defendant’s words to be struck from the record.

Dated: This 17th day of October 2023

 

[Dartanboy]

MOTION TO STRIKE
The Defendant spoke out of turn, and prior to the Writ Of Summons. In addition, the Defendant submitted new evidence without being prompted by the Court. Therefore, the Plaintiff requests for the Defendant’s words to be struck from the record.

Dated: This 17th day of October 2023

The motion to strike is approved, as the Defendant spoke out of turn, however I will note that new evidence is always acceptable in an Answer to Complaint.

 

[Dartanboy]

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

The defendant @Babysoga4real is required to appear before the court in the case of The Lovely Law Firm v. BabySoga [2023] FCR 87. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgement based on the known facts of this case.

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.​

 

[Babysoga4real]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

CIVIL ACTION

babysoga Defendant

V.

The Lovely Law Firm Plaintiff

DEFENSE

I. INTRODUCTION

The Defendant, babysoga, responds to the Complaint filed by The Lovely Law Firm and offers the following defense to the claims raised against them, supplemented by new evidence presented by the Defendant.

II. PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS

The Defendant acknowledges that they were hired as an associate at The Lovely Law Firm on October 16, 2023, and that they were also employed at The Redmont Law Firm as a partner at the same time. The Defendant now submits evidence (provided in the link) that during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm, there were no emotional problems.

III. DEFENSE AGAINST CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

A. Non-Compete Clause

The Defendant asserts that the non-compete clause, as outlined in Evidence A, is overly restrictive and unenforceable under the laws of this Commonwealth. Non-compete agreements must be reasonable in scope, duration, and geographic limitation to be legally valid. The Defendant argues that they did not violate this clause and was hired for only one day, thus not competing with the Plaintiff.

B. Legal Fees and Extra Breach Fee

The Defendant disputes the claims for legal fees and an extra breach fee. The Defendant argues that the prevailing party clause and the extra breach fee, as outlined in Evidence A, should not apply in this case, as the Defendant did not breach the employment contract. The Defendant also contends that even if a breach is found, the terms set in the employment contract are excessive and contrary to public policy. The Defendant asks the court to declare these clauses unenforceable.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Defendant prays that the Court:

Dismisses the claims made by The Lovely Law Firm and declares the non-compete clause unenforceable.
Rules that the prevailing party clause and extra breach fee are inapplicable and unenforceable.
Provides any other relief the Court deems just and equitable.
V. NEW EVIDENCE

The Defendant presents the evidence (provided in the link) demonstrating that during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm, there were no emotional problems. This evidence should serve to support the Defendant's position that they were not in breach of the employment contract.

VI. CONCLUSION

The Defendant maintains that they did not breach the non-compete clause as alleged by The Lovely Law Firm and that the non-compete clause itself is unenforceable. The Defendant also argues that the legal fees and extra breach fee should not apply in this case. Furthermore, the Defendant submits new evidence showing that there were no emotional problems during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm.

The Defendant respectfully requests that the Court dismiss the Plaintiff's claims, declare the non-compete clause unenforceable, and grant any other appropriate relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

Respectfully submitted,

 

[Dartanboy]

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT

CIVIL ACTION

babysoga Defendant

V.

The Lovely Law Firm Plaintiff

DEFENSE

I. INTRODUCTION

The Defendant, babysoga, responds to the Complaint filed by The Lovely Law Firm and offers the following defense to the claims raised against them, supplemented by new evidence presented by the Defendant.

II. PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS

The Defendant acknowledges that they were hired as an associate at The Lovely Law Firm on October 16, 2023, and that they were also employed at The Redmont Law Firm as a partner at the same time. The Defendant now submits evidence (provided in the link) that during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm, there were no emotional problems.

III. DEFENSE AGAINST CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

A. Non-Compete Clause

The Defendant asserts that the non-compete clause, as outlined in Evidence A, is overly restrictive and unenforceable under the laws of this Commonwealth. Non-compete agreements must be reasonable in scope, duration, and geographic limitation to be legally valid. The Defendant argues that they did not violate this clause and was hired for only one day, thus not competing with the Plaintiff.

B. Legal Fees and Extra Breach Fee

The Defendant disputes the claims for legal fees and an extra breach fee. The Defendant argues that the prevailing party clause and the extra breach fee, as outlined in Evidence A, should not apply in this case, as the Defendant did not breach the employment contract. The Defendant also contends that even if a breach is found, the terms set in the employment contract are excessive and contrary to public policy. The Defendant asks the court to declare these clauses unenforceable.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

The Defendant prays that the Court:

Dismisses the claims made by The Lovely Law Firm and declares the non-compete clause unenforceable.
Rules that the prevailing party clause and extra breach fee are inapplicable and unenforceable.
Provides any other relief the Court deems just and equitable.
V. NEW EVIDENCE

The Defendant presents the evidence (provided in the link) demonstrating that during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm, there were no emotional problems. This evidence should serve to support the Defendant's position that they were not in breach of the employment contract.

VI. CONCLUSION

The Defendant maintains that they did not breach the non-compete clause as alleged by The Lovely Law Firm and that the non-compete clause itself is unenforceable. The Defendant also argues that the legal fees and extra breach fee should not apply in this case. Furthermore, the Defendant submits new evidence showing that there were no emotional problems during their one-day employment at The Lovely Law Firm.

The Defendant respectfully requests that the Court dismiss the Plaintiff's claims, declare the non-compete clause unenforceable, and grant any other appropriate relief as the Court deems just and equitable.

Respectfully submitted,

I do not see a link, would youvplease attach the evidence?

In the meantime, the Plaintiff has 72 hours to provide an Opening Statement.

 

[Babysoga4real]

Your honor I do not have the prove as shown because I am on vacation and don't have discord

 

[Babysoga4real]

The motion to strike is approved, as the Defendant spoke out of turn, however I will note that new evidence is always acceptable in an Answer to Complaint.

As you said here it is always acceptable

 

[Dartanboy]

As you said here it is always acceptable

New evidence is acceptable, but you didn't actually provide new evidence.

Furthermore, I've already warned you not to speak out of turn, but now you are making messages without the proper format, causing disruption in this courtroom.

I hereby charge BabySoga with Contempt or Court and order the Department of Justice to fine/jail them appropriately.

BabySoga, you must use proper formats (see the Objections Guide and Motions Guide I told you read in a previous case) when in this courtroom.

 

[Babysoga4real]

Your honor I did say that I am on vacation we should call in staff to put this court on break as I got bad injury today I broke a leg climbing [USERGROUP=9]@Staff[/USERGROUP]

 

[Dartanboy]

Your honor I did say that I am on vacation we should call in staff to put this court on break as I got bad injury today I broke a leg climbing [USERGROUP=9]@Staff[/USERGROUP]

The Plaintiff's deadline has not changed.

BabySoga, you are the Defendant, and if you need an extension for IRL circumstances you may request one on this thread, however rudely interrupting and trying to involve Staff in a Government process is, once again, disruptive to this court. I hereby charge BabySoga with another count of Contempt of Court and order the Department of Justice to fine/jail them appropriately.

 

[Babysoga4real]

Belize this hurting a server rule

 

[Babysoga4real]

I need 6 More weeks

And I am calling in Staffe

 

[Babysoga4real]

Your ass I am nit compeming the court

 

[itsBlazeX]

May it please the court,
Your honor, we are here today because the Defendant knowingly agreed to a contract that they were in violation of. When the Defendant was hired at the Lovely Law Firm, we were not aware that they were still working at the Redmont Law Firm. The Defendant agreed to and signed a contract stating they shall not be employed at another law firm.

While the Defendant claims that the non-compete clause in their employment contract was unenforceable due to its restrictiveness, this is not true. The clause states “During the term of this agreement and for two weeks thereafter, the employee shall not engage, directly or indirectly, as an employee, officer, manager, partner, associate, paralegal, or owner of any law firm in competition with the employer or any of its subsidiaries. The managing partner may waive this provision at his/her discretion.” A non-compete clause is considered standard in any employment contract, and this clause is reasonable in scope, duration, and geographic limitation. A clause limiting an employee from working at a competing law firm is very reasonable as it protects the employer from internal competition.

The Defendant claims that they did not breach the employment contract, however given the evidence above, this is proven to be false. The Defendant very clearly breached the non-compete clause of the contract, by being employed as a partner at the Redmont Law Firm very clearly violates the clause, which states that the employee shall not be employed at another law firm, while employed with the Lovely Law Firm. The Defendant also claims the extra breach fee does not apply, as the terms of the contract are excessive. The terms set in the employment contract are reasonable, as they compensate the employee (salary) while protecting the employer. An employment contract without a non compete clause would harm the employer, as it would allow the employee to compete with the Lovely Law Firm, which the Defendant was doing by being employed at the Redmont Law Firm. An extra breach fee is also necessary, as the threat of punishment is needed to prevent the employee from breaching the contract.

By taking the facts above into account, it is clear that the Defendant not only violated their employment contract, but that the contract they agreed to was reasonable for both parties. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be granted a full prayer for relief. Thank you.

 

[itsBlazeX]

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure​

The Defendant has spoken out of turn several times, and in a very harsh manner. In addition, the Defendant is attempting to call staff into a matter in which they are not needed.

 

[SumoMC]

Your Honor,

I apologize for the out of turn but the defendant stated that an associate of the Redmont Law Firm was taking this case.

This is false, she has not retained us in this matter and has lied to the court.

We will also not be taking this case at all as we are also a wronged party in the case as well.

Thank you Your Honor

 

[Dartanboy]

Belize this hurting a server rule

I need 6 More weeks

And I am calling in Staffe

Your ass I am nit compeming the court

BabySoga, there is nothing wrong with asking for an extension, and I will be  approving your request for a 6-week hiatus since you broke your leg, with the following stipulation:
If you gain more than 6 hours of playtime than you have right now, the extension will be immediately revoked as that would be evidence that you don't really need the extension.

That being said, swearing at the Court is not tolerated, and you are hereby charged with another count of Contempt of Court, and I order the Department of Justice to fine/jail BabySoga appropriately.

 

[Dartanboy]

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure​

The Defendant has spoken out of turn several times, and in a very harsh manner. In addition, the Defendant is attempting to call staff into a matter in which they are not needed.

Sustained, but no action taken as it has already been dealt with.

 

[Dartanboy]

Your Honor,

I apologize for the out of turn but the defendant stated that an associate of the Redmont Law Firm was taking this case.

This is false, she has not retained us in this matter and has lied to the court.

We will also not be taking this case at all as we are also a wronged party in the case as well.

Thank you Your Honor

Thank you for letting the court know.

 

[Babysoga4real]

If you gain more than 6 hours of playtime than you have right now, the extension will be immediately revoked as that would be evidence that you don't really need the extension. Your honor I have thus playtime

 

[Babysoga4real]

Your honor that doesn't say in the law

 

[Babysoga4real]

BabySoga, there is nothing wrong with asking for an extension, and I will be  approving your request for a 6-week hiatus since you broke your leg, with the following stipulation:
If you gain more than 6 hours of playtime than you have right now, the extension will be immediately revoked as that would be evidence that you don't really need the extension.

That being said, swearing at the Court is not tolerated, and you are hereby charged with another count of Contempt of Court, and I order the Department of Justice to fine/jail

Now I think you don't understand my situation your honor I am in a hospital and can't get playtime but am bored so I write here but
This stressing me agree to all wahr being accused of .

 

[Babysoga4real]

Lovely law I did write tu sumoMx that u am quitting and did write
I would pay 2.5k

 

[itsBlazeX]

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure
The Defendant spoke out of turn many times, when it was made very clear by the judge this case would be in recess for 6 weeks. Furthermore, the Defendant was fired from the Redmont Law Firm, and didn’t quit. Therefore, the Defendant has lied to the court again.

 

[Dartanboy]

If you gain more than 6 hours of playtime than you have right now, the extension will be immediately revoked as that would be evidence that you don't really need the extension. Your honor I have thus playtime

Your honor that doesn't say in the law

Lovely law I did write tu sumoMx that u am quitting and did write
I would pay 2.5k

Again, this Court will be in recess for 6 weeks because you are in the hospital.

BabySoga, if you are healthy sooner than that, simply provide your Opening Statement and we will continue the case.

Also, a word of advice:
I don't think you understood my previous ruling, and you even seemingly argued against yourself. I  highly suggest you hire another lawyer or ask for a Public Defender.

 

[Dartanboy]

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure
The Defendant spoke out of turn many times, when it was made very clear by the judge this case would be in recess for 6 weeks. Furthermore, the Defendant was fired from the Redmont Law Firm, and didn’t quit. Therefore, the Defendant has lied to the court again.

 Sustained, the Defendant spoke out of turn. It seems to have been a misunderstanding so no action will be taken this time.

 

[Babysoga4real]

Thank you

 

[Babysoga4real]

I am qutting Dc for now

 

[Babysoga4real]

Just let me write that I agree to everything I am accused of

 

[Dartanboy]

Just let me write that I agree to everything I am accused of

Do you want Summary Judgement?

 

[itsBlazeX]

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT
The Defendant has stated that they agree to everything they were accused of. In addition, a 6 week hiatus would violate the Plaintiff’s right to a speedy trial.

 

[Babysoga4real]

Your honor do continue with summary judgment please

 

[Babysoga4real]

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure
The Defendant spoke out of turn many times, when it was made very clear by the judge this case would be in recess for 6 weeks. Furthermore, the Defendant was fired from the Redmont Law Firm, and didn’t quit. Therefore, the Defendant has lied to the court again.

Your honor blazeX disturbed the ourts resaiscess

 

[Dartanboy]

Thank you for the reply.

This case is now in recess until a verdict is delivered.

 

[Dartanboy]

OBJECTION
Breach of Procedure
The Defendant spoke out of turn many times, when it was made very clear by the judge this case would be in recess for 6 weeks. Furthermore, the Defendant was fired from the Redmont Law Firm, and didn’t quit. Therefore, the Defendant has lied to the court again.

Your honor blazeX disturbed the ourts resaiscess

Overruled. Objections and Motions are generally acceptable until a verdict is delivered.

 

[Babysoga4real]

Not if a court.is o. Rescaise

 

[Dartanboy]

Not if a court.is o. Rescaise

Do not reduce this courtroom to a place to argue with me. If you feel I have made an error of law, please file a Motion to Reconsider and use the proper format.

Your disruptive behavior will not be tolerated and you will be charged with Contempt of Court for a fourth time if this continues.

 

[Babysoga4real]

Your honor the justice dept. Doesn't have a punishment for this so I can get as may as I want

 

[Babysoga4real]

Motion to Reconsider

I think that blace disrupted the court

 

[Babysoga4real]

And call in public def.

 

[Dartanboy]

Your honor the justice dept. Doesn't have a punishment for this so I can get as may as I want

The Federal Court finds BabySoga in Contempt of Court and I hereby order the Department of Justice to fine BabySoga $2500 and sentence them to 10 minutes in jail, in addition to the previous punishments.

 

[Dartanboy]

Motion to Reconsider

I think that blace disrupted the court

Overruled. There is literally no substance to that motion and I don't know what it means.

 

[Dartanboy]

And call in public def.

This court has already gone into recess and you requested Summary Judgement.