Lawsuit: In Session UnityMaster v. xEndeavour [2025] FCR 16

AmityBlamity said:

Objection


Non-Responsive

End didn't answer the question, again. I asked if p-003 was the form used to submit articles to Politico, not if it was anonymous.

Click to expand...
Sustained, End, please answer whether P-003 is a screenshot of the Politico form.
 
Evidence Submissions:

Unity provides that congress and the public know about him being secretary. You also see department leadership showing that they are surprised by his self appointment and confused over having dual secretaries.

D-007
1739880344474.png


D-008
1739880386328.png

D-009

1739880417667.png


D-010
1739880440288.png


D-011
1739880483127.png
 
Last edited:
AmityBlamity said:

Objection


Non-Responsive

End didn't answer the question, again. I asked if p-003 was the form used to submit articles to Politico, not if it was anonymous.

Click to expand...
Yes it appears to be the form
 
End said:
1. If Unity was Secretary from 27 December, and he claims to have publicly announced this information to Department leadership, Congress, and the Public, please provide evidence of these exchanges where he announces that he is Secretary.
Click to expand...
No
 
End said:
Unity provides that congress and the public know about him being secretary. You also see department leadership showing that they are surprised by his self appointment and confused over having dual secretaries.
Click to expand...

Objection


Breach of Procedure

Counsel is speaking out of turn and testifying.

 
End said:
The Department of Construction has, for a long time, had deputy secretaries for Inspections and construction. Under Secretary Superior, all Construction Managers and Inspection Managers were Deputy Secretaries. Evidence that supports this is no longer available, as all above members were in the Cabinet DIscord with the Deputy Secretary role and in the DCT Discord with the Discord role.

However, I will reach out to witnesses for testimony.

Here Unity is seen discussing the matter about how he fired Deputy Secretaries because it was his belief that, despite convention, departments could only have one deputy.
Click to expand...

Objection


Breach of Procedure and Counsel is Testifying

 
Alexander P. Love said:

Objection


Breach of Procedure

Counsel is speaking out of turn and testifying.

Click to expand...
Sustained, the comments are struck but the evidence is not.
 
End said:
2. Why did Superior still have his Secretary roles on the 29th of December alongside Unity?

3. What was the longest period from project completion to payment that a Constructor waited for funds during Unitymaster's secretary tenure?
Click to expand...
2. Issues with Discord relating to firing people at the time.

3. My client no longer has access to DCT. Any answer would be speculation.
 
2. Issues with Discord relating to firing people at the time.

Can you please be more specific? What issues were you experiencing with Discord?
 
Evidence of non-payment:

Project Wooden Axe: Completed 29 Dec, Paid after he left office.


D-012
1739887981961.png


D-013
1739888071919.png
 
Last edited:
Dartanboy said:
Sustained, the comments are struck but the evidence is not.
Click to expand...

Motion


MOTION TO RECONSIDER

I provided evidence and annotated what that evidence was providing to the case. What part of providing evidence in Discovery and annotating the evidence is outside of court rules?

The alternative is I cold drop evidence which has no explanation as to what I'm trying to draw your attention to.



Motion stands for both objections on breach of procedure.
 
End said:
2. Issues with Discord relating to firing people at the time.

Can you please be more specific? What issues were you experiencing with Discord?
Click to expand...

Objection



BREACH OF PROCEDURE

Per Rule 4.8, Plaintiff and Defendant may ask up to 5 relevant questions while within discovery to each other... The Defendant has asked his five questions. He can't ask anymore.

 

Case Filing


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


xEndeavour
Counterplaintiff

v.

UnityMaster
Counterdefendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

Unitymaster has filed a case against me which is frivolous in nature. It's a waste of my own time and effort to be litigating a case which has absolutely no standing, purpose, or value, and which I assess was filed vexatiously.
Click to expand...

I. PARTIES
1. xEndeavour (Counterplaintiff)
2. UNityMaster (Counterdefendant)

II. FACTS
1. UnityMaster has filed a case which has established no breach of law, nor established any value. Frivolous litigation is proven in that there is use of legal processes with complete disregard for the merit of one's own arguments.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Legal Damages Act entitles the prevailing party to a minimum of $5,000 or 30% in legal fees. I self represent as a qualified individual, where I am utilising my own qualification that I paid for to defend myself. As such, I have spent less of my limited time online building and earning money in my primary role as a constructor due to this legal action. My monthly income is averaging over $100,000 currently and I've not been able to build in the last week since this case was filed.
IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. 30% of $260,000 is $78,000, so the counterplaintiff seeks $12,000 in legal fees, or compensatory damages if legal fees are not accepted by this Court.
2. A public apology, approved by the court and posted to news.
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, 2025.

 
AmityBlamity said:

Objection



BREACH OF PROCEDURE

Per Rule 4.8, Plaintiff and Defendant may ask up to 5 relevant questions while within discovery to each other... The Defendant has asked his five questions. He can't ask anymore.

Click to expand...

Motion


MOTION TO COMPELL

I asked a simple question your honour:

1. Why did Superior still have his Secretary roles on the 29th of December alongside Unity?

This is not a suitable answer as it is not sufficient in detail, as such I have asked it again:

Issues with Discord relating to firing people at the time

What issues is the individual experiencing? No issues appear in server announcements or change log relating to the plugin which links roles, in fact they show that they are working noting Unitymaster received his roles.

The Plaintiff has clearly just snubbed my question with a short and ambiguous response which barely answers the question. I am asking for tangible specifics, not esoterical excuses.

 
AmityBlamity said:

Objection



BREACH OF PROCEDURE

Per Rule 4.8, Plaintiff and Defendant may ask up to 5 relevant questions while within discovery to each other... The Defendant has asked his five questions. He can't ask anymore.

Click to expand...
As with witness testimony, a reasonable follow-up question is still considered part of the same question.
 
End said:

Motion


MOTION TO RECONSIDER

I provided evidence and annotated what that evidence was providing to the case. What part of providing evidence in Discovery and annotating the evidence is outside of court rules?

The alternative is I cold drop evidence which has no explanation as to what I'm trying to draw your attention to.



Motion stands for both objections on breach of procedure.
Click to expand...
You may amend your Answer during Discovery, there is no need to add additional information all over the place causing disorganization.
 
End said:

Motion


MOTION TO COMPELL

I asked a simple question your honour:

1. Why did Superior still have his Secretary roles on the 29th of December alongside Unity?

This is not a suitable answer as it is not sufficient in detail, as such I have asked it again:

Issues with Discord relating to firing people at the time

What issues is the individual experiencing? No issues appear in server announcements or change log relating to the plugin which links roles, in fact they show that they are working noting Unitymaster received his roles.

The Plaintiff has clearly just snubbed my question with a short and ambiguous response which barely answers the question. I am asking for tangible specifics, not esoterical excuses.

Click to expand...
Sustained for the same reason the Objection was overruled. Amity please answer the question.
 

Motion


MOTION TO DISMISS
Frivolous Claims

Your honour, this case is nothing but frivolous.

The Plaintiff has claimed that:
1. I have defamed them by making malicious statements which have incurred damages which are damages unproven, unquantified, and not presented. Further, there is no clear evidence supporting any incorrect statements made.

2. I have slandered the plaintiff through public statements. There is no clear evidence supporting any incorrect statements made.

Lets talk about specific instances:

1. On December 27th 2024 President UnityMaster hired himself as Secretary of Construction & Transportation.
Click to expand...

Evidence suggests that this occurred on the 29th of December and that no key stakeholders such as Department Leadership, the Public, or Congress were aware of his appointment. The Plaintiff has failed to prove otherwise, and it is improbable that this would have gone unnoticed by the nation for 72+ hours.

2. On January 1st 2025 at 17:10 GMT xEndeavour posted a Discord message which claimed that President UnityMaster made themselves Secretary of Construction and Transportation while The_Superior10 was still in the role and fired him. xEndeavour also claimed that President UnityMaster stopped approving projects, stole a build from FlyingBlocks, planned to remove the racetrack, promoted unqualified constructors, firing deputy secretaries and not appointing new ones and leaking classified information.
Click to expand...

I have provided evidence of Superior being the Secretary on this date and making statements on the 29th of December claiming that he was still Secretary and not tracking any changes to his employment. He held roles concurrently to Secretary Superior, if his story lines up, for up to three days. The plaintiff has failed to prove otherwise.

The plaintiff has failed to show that Unity was approving projects.

The plaintiff's government was found to have wrongly taken FLyingBlock's building in a concurrent court proceeding.

The plaintiff says that the racetrack [bathurst] is moving in D-008.

The plaintiff promoted Justadumpling from Trainee Constructor to Construction Manager on or around 30 Dec (d-007). The members were removed from that role after Unity left office due to not being suitably qualified.

As you can see below, the Secretary provides that we had six deputies which were dismissed by unity, and which Unity discusses in evidence above himself.

D-017
1739891265096.png


The Dept. of Justice has not pursued a charges against me for leaking classified information. I invoked my rights as a whistleblower to release information as discussed with the Dept. of Justice.

3. On January 2nd 2025 Politico, xEndeavours news agency, released an article claiming that President Unitymaster is facing scrutiny for several actions taken during his presidency. It claimed that President UnityMaster dismissed the Secretary of Construction and Transport, The_Superior10, and appointed himself to the role without informing relevant parties. The article also aleges that President UnityMaster failed to respond to requests from the Department of Construction and Transport and did not attend his own confirmation hearing. The article also claims that President UnityMaster bypassed department leadership to hire individuals to senior positions, which allegedly raised legal concerns. The article claims as well that president UnityMaster authorized the seizure of Abbots property at a significantly lower price than its market value, resulting in a lawsuit. His proposed relocation of key buildings has allegedly caused public controversy. Additionally, the article claimed that President UnityMaster fired all deputy secretaries without appointing replacements and limited staff involvement in project updates. There are also alleged reports of unpaid commissions and department commitments. These actions have raised allegedly questions about President UnityMaster's leadership and legal adherence.
Click to expand...

I invite the plaintiff to read the constitution and specifically pay attention to the right to political communication. Not only is this all true, as shown above, it's protected by rights, regardless of who authoured the article.

The Plaintiff is yet to prove any of their arguments, has had almost all of their arguments disproven by defence evidence, and is asking irrelevant questions about an article I didn't author.

This case is frivolous your honour, there is no two ways about it.

 
End said:

Motion


MOTION TO DISMISS
Frivolous Claims

Your honour, this case is nothing but frivolous.

The Plaintiff has claimed that:
1. I have defamed them by making malicious statements which have incurred damages which are damages unproven, unquantified, and not presented. Further, there is no clear evidence supporting any incorrect statements made.

2. I have slandered the plaintiff through public statements. There is no clear evidence supporting any incorrect statements made.

Lets talk about specific instances:



Evidence suggests that this occurred on the 29th of December and that no key stakeholders such as Department Leadership, the Public, or Congress were aware of his appointment. The Plaintiff has failed to prove otherwise, and it is improbable that this would have gone unnoticed by the nation for 72+ hours.



I have provided evidence of Superior being the Secretary on this date and making statements on the 29th of December claiming that he was still Secretary and not tracking any changes to his employment. He held roles concurrently to Secretary Superior, if his story lines up, for up to three days. The plaintiff has failed to prove otherwise.

The plaintiff has failed to show that Unity was approving projects.

The plaintiff's government was found to have wrongly taken FLyingBlock's building in a concurrent court proceeding.

The plaintiff says that the racetrack [bathurst] is moving in D-008.

The plaintiff promoted Justadumpling from Trainee Constructor to Construction Manager on or around 30 Dec (d-007). The members were removed from that role after Unity left office due to not being suitably qualified.

As you can see below, the Secretary provides that we had six deputies which were dismissed by unity, and which Unity discusses in evidence above himself.

D-017
View attachment 52028

The Dept. of Justice has not pursued a charges against me for leaking classified information. I invoked my rights as a whistleblower to release information as discussed with the Dept. of Justice.



I invite the plaintiff to read the constitution and specifically pay attention to the right to political communication. Not only is this all true, as shown above, it's protected by rights, regardless of who authoured the article.

The Plaintiff is yet to prove any of their arguments, has had almost all of their arguments disproven by defence evidence, and is asking irrelevant questions about an article I didn't author.

This case is frivolous your honour, there is no two ways about it.

Click to expand...
 Overruled, you didnt specify a rule to dismiss under.
 

Motion


MOTION TO DISMISS
Frivolous Claims/Lack of Claim/Res Judicata

Your honour, this case is nothing but frivolous.

The Plaintiff has claimed that:
1. I have defamed them by making malicious statements which have incurred damages which are damages unproven, unquantified, and not presented. Further, there is no clear evidence supporting any incorrect statements made.

2. I have slandered the plaintiff through public statements. There is no clear evidence supporting any incorrect statements made.

Lets talk about specific instances:

1. On December 27th 2024 President UnityMaster hired himself as Secretary of Construction & Transportation.
Click to expand...

Evidence suggests that this occurred on the 29th of December and that no key stakeholders such as Department Leadership, the Public, or Congress were aware of his appointment. The Plaintiff has failed to prove otherwise, and it is improbable that this would have gone unnoticed by the nation for 72+ hours.

2. On January 1st 2025 at 17:10 GMT xEndeavour posted a Discord message which claimed that President UnityMaster made themselves Secretary of Construction and Transportation while The_Superior10 was still in the role and fired him. xEndeavour also claimed that President UnityMaster stopped approving projects, stole a build from FlyingBlocks, planned to remove the racetrack, promoted unqualified constructors, firing deputy secretaries and not appointing new ones and leaking classified information.
Click to expand...

I have provided evidence of Superior being the Secretary on this date and making statements on the 29th of December claiming that he was still Secretary and not tracking any changes to his employment. He held roles concurrently to Secretary Superior, if his story lines up, for up to three days. The plaintiff has failed to prove otherwise.

The plaintiff has failed to show that Unity was approving projects.

The plaintiff's government was found to have wrongly taken FLyingBlock's building in a concurrent court proceeding. (Res Judicata)

The plaintiff says that the racetrack [bathurst] is moving in D-008.

The plaintiff promoted Justadumpling from Trainee Constructor to Construction Manager on or around 30 Dec (d-007). The members were removed from that role after Unity left office due to not being suitably qualified.

As you can see below, the Secretary provides that we had six deputies which were dismissed by unity, and which Unity discusses in evidence above himself.

D-017
1739892145855.png


The Dept. of Justice has not pursued a charges against me for leaking classified information. I invoked my rights as a whistleblower to release information as discussed with the Dept. of Justice.

3. On January 2nd 2025 Politico, xEndeavours news agency, released an article claiming that President Unitymaster is facing scrutiny for several actions taken during his presidency. It claimed that President UnityMaster dismissed the Secretary of Construction and Transport, The_Superior10, and appointed himself to the role without informing relevant parties. The article also aleges that President UnityMaster failed to respond to requests from the Department of Construction and Transport and did not attend his own confirmation hearing. The article also claims that President UnityMaster bypassed department leadership to hire individuals to senior positions, which allegedly raised legal concerns. The article claims as well that president UnityMaster authorized the seizure of Abbots property at a significantly lower price than its market value, resulting in a lawsuit. His proposed relocation of key buildings has allegedly caused public controversy. Additionally, the article claimed that President UnityMaster fired all deputy secretaries without appointing replacements and limited staff involvement in project updates. There are also alleged reports of unpaid commissions and department commitments. These actions have raised allegedly questions about President UnityMaster's leadership and legal adherence.
Click to expand...

I invite the plaintiff to read the constitution and specifically pay attention to the right to political communication. Not only is this all true, as shown above, it's protected by rights, regardless of who authoured the article.

The Plaintiff is yet to prove any of their arguments, has had almost all of their arguments disproven by defence evidence, and is asking irrelevant questions about an article I didn't author.

This case is frivolous your honour, there is no two ways about it.

 
Dartanboy said:
This seems to be an inconsistency in the court rules. I'll allow the motion. The Defense has 24 hours to respond to the Motion to Dismiss before I make a decision.
Click to expand...
Your Honor, does the original timeline for Discovery still apply?
 

Objection


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Improper Evidence

Your Honor, all exhibits presented by the defendant are cropped and exclude context.

In addition, D-004, D-005, D-007, D-008, D-009, D-010, and D-011 have been modified with a marker. Precedent from FCR 102 [ 2024] Commonwealth of Redmont v. Alexander Love makes it very clear that tampered evidence is not allowed in court.

Case: Lawsuit: Adjourned - The Commonwealth of Redmont v. Alexanderlove [2024] FCR 102

I move to strike all exhibits presented by the defendant.

 
AmityBlamity said:

Objection


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
OBJECTION - Improper Evidence

Your Honor, all exhibits presented by the defendant are cropped and exclude context.

In addition, D-004, D-005, D-007, D-008, D-009, D-010, and D-011 have been modified with a marker. Precedent from FCR 102 [ 2024] Commonwealth of Redmont v. Alexander Love makes it very clear that tampered evidence is not allowed in court.

Case: Lawsuit: Adjourned - The Commonwealth of Redmont v. Alexanderlove [2024] FCR 102

I move to strike all exhibits presented by the defendant.

Click to expand...
 Overruled, that is the most ridiculous argument for Improper Evidence I've ever heard. What do you expect? A video of every Discord message End has ever received?

This court seeks the truth, and will allow this evidence to be presented.

The case you cited shows evidence with ink covering portions of the evidence, not a screenshot which didn't contain as much info as you'd like.
 
Discovery has ended. The Plaintiff has 72 hours to file an Opening Statement.

Also recall the deadline to respond to the Motion to Dismiss.
 
Dartanboy said:
 Overruled, that is the most ridiculous argument for Improper Evidence I've ever heard. What do you expect? A video of every Discord message End has ever received?

This court seeks the truth, and will allow this evidence to be presented.

The case you cited shows evidence with ink covering portions of the evidence, not a screenshot which didn't contain as much info as you'd like.
Click to expand...

Motion


Motion to Reconsider

Follow your own precedent. Did you not read the objection? We are objecting to marked up evidence that literally has yellow marker all over the place.

 
Alexander P. Love said:

Motion


Motion to Reconsider

Follow your own precedent. Did you not read the objection? We are objecting to marked up evidence that literally has yellow marker all over the place.

Click to expand...
I will clarify the precedent: Evidence tampered with in such a way to cause significant difficulty in viewing it, such as opaque ink covering text, is  generally not permitted.

A highlight to emphasize something causes no difficulty and hides nothing.

I will not strike the completely reasonable evidence.
 
Dartanboy said:
I will clarify the precedent: Evidence tampered with in such a way to cause significant difficulty in viewing it, such as opaque ink covering text, is  generally not permitted.

A highlight to emphasize something causes no difficulty and hides nothing.

I will not strike the completely reasonable evidence.
Click to expand...

Motion


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO RECONSIDER

Your Honor, the Plaintiff respectfully requests you to reconsider this decision of clarifying the precedent. Looking at the description of Improper Evidence as stated in this court's guide to objections, we read: "Refers to evidence that is improperly collected, possibly altered, or presented inappropriately." This definition clearly specifies any evidence that may possibly be altered as Improper Evidence. In this case we have pieces of evidence that are not only possibly altered, but clearly altered, as you, Your Honor, have stated yourself when you mentioned a highlight having been applied to the evidence. Following the guidelines as set out by this court it is therefore improper evidence, and should be struck.

 
Your honour, If I may respond to the above motion:

The evidence is highlighted. When you are sending bulk amounts of text I would consider it completely appropriate to draw attention to parts of your evidence through the practice of highlighting.

The marking on the evidence does not obstruct or change any meaning of the material provided. It would be an absurdity to consider highlighting as improper alteration of evidence, and even more so, to make an individual resubmit all of their evidence again without lines of transparent yellow highlighter on it.
 
End said:
Your honour, If I may respond to the above motion:

The evidence is highlighted. When you are sending bulk amounts of text I would consider it completely appropriate to draw attention to parts of your evidence through the practice of highlighting.

The marking on the evidence does not obstruct or change any meaning of the material provided. It would be an absurdity to consider highlighting as improper alteration of evidence, and even more so, to make an individual resubmit all of their evidence again without lines of transparent yellow highlighter on it.
Click to expand...

Objection


Breach of Procedure

Defendant is talking out of turn. Motions require permission to respond to.

 
AmityBlamity said:

Objection


Breach of Procedure

Defendant is talking out of turn. Motions require permission to respond to.

Click to expand...
Objection overruled, as I was going to ask him to answer.

End, you're already on thin ice with speaking out of turn. Please refrain from doing so again.
 
AmityBlamity said:

Motion


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO RECONSIDER

Your Honor, the Plaintiff respectfully requests you to reconsider this decision of clarifying the precedent. Looking at the description of Improper Evidence as stated in this court's guide to objections, we read: "Refers to evidence that is improperly collected, possibly altered, or presented inappropriately." This definition clearly specifies any evidence that may possibly be altered as Improper Evidence. In this case we have pieces of evidence that are not only possibly altered, but clearly altered, as you, Your Honor, have stated yourself when you mentioned a highlight having been applied to the evidence. Following the guidelines as set out by this court it is therefore improper evidence, and should be struck.

Click to expand...
You're being ridiculous. Even if this was sustained, the Defense would simply resubmit the exact same information without highlights.

This is a courtroom, not a circus. This issue has been decided on.

Overruled.
 
Dartanboy said:
You're being ridiculous. Even if this was sustained, the Defense would simply resubmit the exact same information without highlights.

This is a courtroom, not a circus. This issue has been decided on.

Overruled.
Click to expand...

Motion


Motion to Recuse

The presiding judge has called my employee “ridiculous” not once but twice so far in this case. This suggests prejudice against the counsel handling this case on behalf of the plaintiff. Furthermore, the presiding judge is blatantly ignoring court procedure. He is allowing the admission of modified evidence, which could possibly harm my client in ways that can or cannot be foreseen. We therefore motion to recuse, I take it seriously when judges name call lawyers.

 
Alexander P. Love said:

Motion


Motion to Recuse

The presiding judge has called my employee “ridiculous” not once but twice so far in this case. This suggests prejudice against the counsel handling this case on behalf of the plaintiff. Furthermore, the presiding judge is blatantly ignoring court procedure. He is allowing the admission of modified evidence, which could possibly harm my client in ways that can or cannot be foreseen. We therefore motion to recuse, I take it seriously when judges name call lawyers.

Click to expand...
Motion denied, as there is no bias nor appearance of it. Both sides have acted completely ridiculous in this case, and I will not allow it.

End has written his magnum opus on bbcode and background colors and been punished (thrice) for his disruptions. Dragon Law has wasted the court's time and their own by arguing for hours over whether some highlighted text is allowable. I've said several times it's allowed but you've continued to fight me on it.

I've also said they're  being ridiculous. I didn't say they are.
 
Dartanboy said:
This seems to be an inconsistency in the court rules. I'll allow the motion. The Defense has 24 hours to respond to the Motion to Dismiss before I make a decision.
Click to expand...
I realize I made a mistake. The  Plaintiff has 24 hours to respond.

This is my mistake, so the timer starts now.
 
Dartanboy said:
Motion denied, as there is no bias nor appearance of it. Both sides have acted completely ridiculous in this case, and I will not allow it.

End has written his magnum opus on bbcode and background colors and been punished (thrice) for his disruptions. Dragon Law has wasted the court's time and their own by arguing for hours over whether some highlighted text is allowable. I've said several times it's allowed but you've continued to fight me on it.

I've also said they're  being ridiculous. I didn't say they are.
Click to expand...
The plaintiff would like to exercise its right to have another Judge review the motion.
 

Motion


MOTION TO COMPEL

Plaintiff refusing to provide evidence to support legal argument.

Two situations are going to eventuate here your honour:

1. The plaintiff has brought a suit on frivolously because they cannot substantiate their claims, in turn supporting my motion to dismiss.

2. They are refusing to provide evidence to the defence in a case where the defence has the right to know all evidence against them

I ask that you compel the plaintiff to provide their evidence of these claims.

Alexander P. Love said:
No
Click to expand...

 
Dartanboy said:
I realize I made a mistake. The  Plaintiff has 24 hours to respond.

This is my mistake, so the timer starts now.
Click to expand...
Your Honor, I'm respectfully requesting a 24 hour extension due to mental health issues. I apologize for the trouble.
 
AmityBlamity said:
Your Honor, I'm respectfully requesting a 24 hour extension due to mental health issues. I apologize for the trouble.
Click to expand...
Approved for both the Motion to Dismiss Response and Opening Statement, as I want the Response to the Motion prior to Opening Statements.

I'd also inform both parties that I'm still waiting for another Judge to review the Motion to Recuse. I informed the rest of the Judiciary just minutes after it was filed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top