Lawsuit: Dismissed Unfairly Taxed Citizens CALG v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] FCR 77

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lord_Donuticus

Lord_Donuticus

Citizen
Supporter
Grave Digger 3rd Anniversary Legal Eagle Change Maker 1st Anniversary Statesman Popular in the Polls
The_Donuticus
The_Donuticus
Attorney
Joined
Feb 16, 2021
Messages
248
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

Unfairly Taxed Citizens Class Action Lawsuit Group (DouCo Law & Partners Representing)
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

Your Honor,

We have laws for a reason, they exist and must be followed. One of DouCo Law & Partners clients, Milqy, has come to us to represent them in the fact they have been illegally taxed for the plots that they own. The Taxation Act specifically outlines: “8 - Terms of Property Taxation: ...
(2) Plot taxes only apply to the City of Hamilton, unless otherwise provided by Local Governments.” - Only apply to the City of Hamilton. We are not in the City of Hamilton anymore, we are in the City of Reveille and thus any plot taxes charged there are illegal and must be returned.

In understanding that after this revelation a great many citizens will be wanting to get their money back, DouCo Law & Partners has established, to its knowledge, the servers first Class Action Lawsuit Group. Rather than every citizen making their own lawsuit thus clogging up the court, they may contact DouCo Law & Partners to be included as a Plaintiff in this case. There is precedent for a group of citizens to appear as the Plaintiff in a case (Lawsuit: In Session - Corporate Security Union v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] SCR 15) and also for additional claims for relief, in this instance another instance of illegal taxation, to be introduced mid-suit, thus the Plaintiff sees no reason why the courts would not allow this very effective time saving measure and would ask the Court if they would liked to be informed every time a new member joins the Class Action Lawsuit Group or should the Plaintiff just update the list provided below? Furthermore would the court like to impose a limit on when new members can join the Class Action Lawsuit Group, such as after Opening Statements, or can new members join until the case is concluded.

Furthermore due to the unique nature of this case the Plaintiff will require an extended period of discovery with the DEC after opening statements in order to ascertain the full extent of damages done in terms of illegally obtained taxation.

I. PARTIES
1. Unfairly Taxed Citizens Class Action Group
Milqy
Aladeen22
deadwax
Bombaz2005
ElainaThomas29
Gertis7
2. The Commonwealth of Redmont

II. FACTS
1. On January 1st 2020 Congress passed the Taxation Act, outlining the rules for Plot Taxes as only applying to the ‘City of Hamilton’.
2. In December of 2021 the population of Redmont began the process of migrating to a new City ‘Reveille’.
3. Plot Taxes have been charged for this 'City of Reveille', despite no legal right for this. This is due to Government oversight and negligence.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Government had no legal right to take these taxes and thus must return them immediately.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. The return of all illegally seized plot taxes to all members of the Unfairly Taxed Citizens Class Action Group.
2. An extra award of 20% of the value of illegally seized plot taxes to all members of the Unfairly Taxed Citizens Class Action Group, to cover legal fees & as compensation.

1664984826061.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 5th day of October 2022
 
Last edited:
Your Honor,

Some glitch seems to have occurred and posted this to the Supreme Court when it was definitely opened as a thread in the Federal. Please may it be moved.
 
federal-court-png.12082

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS
The Attorney General, or anyone who is allowed to represent the Commonwealth, is required to appear before the court in the case of the Unfairly Taxed Citizens CALG v. The Commonwealth of Redmont. [2022] FCR 77. 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, including the option of an in-game trial should both parties request one.​
 
I will need a final list of members of the class action lawsuit during closing statements. No later.
 
Your honor, the Commonwealth would like a 24-48h extension.
 
The commonwealth may have an extension. They have 30 hours from now to post their reply.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS


Unfairly Taxed Citizens Class Action Lawsuit Group (DouCo Law & Partners Representing)
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS
1. The defense moves that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges that the courts do not have jurisdiction over this issue, as it is a staff issue.

2. Whether the collection of taxes was illegal or not, the government did not actually collect the taxes. A plugin collected the taxes with no manual inputs provided by the Commonwealth.

3. It is not the Commonwealth’s job to make sure that plugins are updated properly to reflect the laws. That is the staff team’s job.

4.If the Plaintiff(s) desire to get their money back, they should contact the staff team, however, I do not know whether they will give it back, as I am not on the staff team.

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 7th day of October 2022
 
Last edited:
The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post a rebuttal or state that they do not want to.
 
Your Honor, the plaintiff has not responded within the given 48 hours.
 
I apologize your honor, I had thought I requested an extention as life has been a bit horrible the last few days - I am happy to elaborate on these details and provide evidence if requested. I hope the court can understand this.
 
Your honor, while the DLA certainly recognizes the importance of allowing extensions when IRL circumstances prevent people from being able to be active, we have noticed that The_Donuticus was on the server today more than two hours ago, suggesting that they should have been able to post a response to the motion. For this reason, we recommend you do not dismiss his Tardiness

Evidence he was online:
image_2022-10-09_182939438.png
 

Attachments

  • image_2022-10-09_182910584.png
    image_2022-10-09_182910584.png
    55.4 KB · Views: 91
The Plaintiff will not be held in contempt of court, however their failure to post a response in time has lost them the ability to rebut the motion.

A ruling on the motion will be made soon.
 
I will be denying this motion to dismiss for the following reason:
While it is true that if a plugin is broken it is a staff issue, there is no reason to believe the plugin is broken. And although the government doesn't manually collect taxes, they still have been getting money from the plugin and if it is determined that the citizens are being taxed unfairly the government must give them their money back because the plugin is giving the taxed money to the government.

The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post their opening statement, and I would like to give them a strong warning to post it on time as they have already missed one deadline.
 
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OPENING STATEMENT

Unfairly Taxed Citizens Class Action Lawsuit Group (DouCo Law & Partners Representing)
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

As the points made in the Motion to Dismiss have been made in this court the Plaintiff would like to rebut them as they are nothing short of fantasy lawyering.

RESPONSE
  1. The idea that this is a staff issue is factually incorrect. At the time of the move to Reveille the Government amended two bills which referred to the City of Hamilton, they amended the ‘Property Fairness Act’ & the ‘Property Definitions Foundation Act’, they just forgot to amend the bill this case is based on. Furthermore in the time since the foundation of the suit the government has moved to amend the ‘Taxation Act’ as well.
  2. The idea that because the Government did not collect the taxes they should have to pay them back is insulting to this court. If someone steals $500,000 and then gives it to someone else that does not mean that person gets to keep it. The same applies here.
  3. The notion that it is not the Commonwealths job to update plugins is true- it is their job to update the laws, the Government is trying to make this about plugins when in reality it is about a negligence to update the laws to reflect the reality.
  4. The idea that the Plaintiff’s in the case should contact the staff team to get their money back once again is wrong as it is the Government that has their money.
Therefore every point in the motion to dismiss is wrong and must be cast down, they are trying to pervert the course of this court by using and referring to means outside this court that are irrelevant. They might as well argue that the sky is green.

----------

Outside of that the Plaintiff would like to raise the following, in the time since this Class Action was raised a member of the Government, who happens to also be a somewhat high ranking staff member, has proposed the 'Reveille Taxation Act' which would make the previously illegal taxation of the Government legal.

Let me be clear, you cannot do something illegal and then after the fact declare it legal. In fact, due to the threat to the constitution and rule of law this Bill in question poses, especially as earlier this week the DLA has messaged the Class Action Laywer asking to drop the case over this bill, the Plaintiff asks that this lawsuit be elevated to the Supreme Court and that all Representatives who believe in the rule of law and the order of things vote against the bill in question that is currently going through the House and threatens to become law - this is a travesty.

The Plaintiff has nothing else to add except for the fact that the fact that the Government has taken these actions clearly prove it as illegal, they have no other recourse than to try and subvert the rule 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 12th day of October 2022
 
1665543738494.png


The Supreme Court has denied the request for this case to be heard within the Supreme Court on the grounds of jurisdiction. The plaintiff can appeal this case's verdict following the entire case's conclusion, following the proper appeal process.​
 
Thank you to the Plaintiff for their opening statement, the Defendant now has 48 hours to post their opening statement.
 
Your honor, Neemfy is not able to respond at this moment so the Commonwealth would like an extension of 24h. Thank you.
 
I will not be granting this extension as it was asked for last minute, and the commonwealth has already received an extension in this case and we are only on opening statements.

We will now move onto witnesses. Both parties have 48 hours from now to list all of your witnesses or state that you don’t have any witnesses.
 
Your honor, The Plaintiff would like to call xEndeavour as the author of the ‘Property Fairness Act’, the ‘Property Definitions Foundation Act’, & the 'Reveille Taxation Act'.
 
The commonwealth has failed to respond within the allotted time. Is is extremely disappointing considering this is their 2nd time failing to meet a deadline in this case, they requested to not dismiss the Plaintiffs tardiness when they were tardy, and they have already received an extension in this case.

For that reason I hereby charge xtub12345 with contempt of court, and order the DOJ to punish him accordingly.
 
xEndeavor will be summoned within the next 24 hours.
 
Your Honor,

For maybe the first time in Redmont's history, I'm actually going to have to cross the aisle on this one. As the new Attorney General (As of for four hours ago) I apologize for the tardiness of the DLA in this case, however it seems that nobody in the DLA seemed it appropriate to inform the court that xtub12345 has left the Department as of three days ago. I once again apologize for this on behalf of the DLA and promise the court that we will do better.

I will of course be handing my Representation of the Plaintiff in this case over to another law firm, in this case Prodigium, and I will recuse myself from all duties in this case on the side of the Commonwealth outside of the administration of assigning a new representative for the Commonwealth which I will endeavour to do in the next few hours.
 
Your Honor,

Prodigium | Attorneys at Law shall be taking over the case. Assigned are Counsel @xLayzur and Co-Counsel @RuckForce. We are requesting a 120 hour recess of the case to reach out to the plaintiff Action Group and have them sign a new retainer and allow the DLA get up to speed with the case given the circumstances.

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 2022
 
dygyee said:
The commonwealth has failed to respond within the allotted time. Is is extremely disappointing considering this is their 2nd time failing to meet a deadline in this case, they requested to not dismiss the Plaintiffs tardiness when they were tardy, and they have already received an extension in this case.

For that reason I hereby charge xtub12345 with contempt of court, and order the DOJ to punish him accordingly.
Click to expand...
Good afternoon, your honor.

xtub12345 resigned from the DLA. While the Commonwealth agrees that we failed to respond in time, we do request that xtub12345 not be charged with contempt, as he was no longer eligible to represent the Commonwealth.

If anyone is at fault, it was the ex-Attorney General.

I have just been assigned this case by the current Attorney General, and will be representing the Commonwealth for the remainder of this case.
 
In response to Dartanman, until this court is informed otherwise, the person who has been litigating this case is responsible to post within the time limit unless the court has been told otherwise. No one informed the court that xtub12345 left the DLA, and while the DLA could have and should have informed the court of his leaving and named his replacement, they didn’t, leaving xtub12345 to respond. Even if his response was I’m no longer working for the DLA, he would’ve been off the hook for the contempt of court charge.

In response to Matthew100x, 120 hours seems like an excessive amount of time, especially considering once this court is in session again we will be waiting for a witness to go appear before the court, and then you will have another 48 hours to post your questions. However you may have 72 hours to reach out to the individuals that are apart of the Plaintiff’s group in the class action lawsuit.

This court is now in recess for 72 hours.
 
This court is back in session.
 
federal-court-png.12082

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

xEndeavour is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of Unfairly Taxed Citizens CALG v. The Commonwealth of Redmont [2022] FCR 77 as a witness.

Please familiarize yourself with the case as it stands at present. You will receive questions and may also be cross-examined.

I ask that all questions be provided to witnesses in a single post. If some questions need to be withheld as they depend on answers given to earlier questions, that is also considered reasonable. Once all witnesses have declared themselves present, the Plaintiff may begin question both witnesses. The Defendant will then have a chance to cross-examine both witnesses.

I am hereby informing each witness to ensure they are aware of the provisions of the law of perjury and its severity. Giving knowingly false testimony is highly illegal. Witnesses are required to tell the truth in their testimonies, pursuant to the Perjury Act​
 
The Plaintiff has 48 hours to post all of their questions to the witness. After the witness answers the questions, the Commonwealth will be able to cross-examine the witness.
 
The Plaintiff has failed to post their questions for the witness within the allotted time. They have lost their ability to ask the witness any questions. I also hereby find Matthew100x guilty of contempt of court, and hereby order the DOJ to fine/jail him the proper amount.

The Commonwealth has 48 hours to cross-examine the witness or state that they have no questions.
 
Your Honor,
Given recent shifts in the law, Prodigium will be stepping down from this case. We ask for the case to be dismissed. (Also was going to be owner vetoed due to the nature of tax records etc)


Thank you for your time
 
Last edited:
Because the request to dismiss the case was from the Plaintiffs lawyer’s and not the plaintiff themself, I will be dismissing this case without prejudice, and if the Plaintiff’s wish to refile this case, they may do so with different lawyers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top