Lawsuit: Dismissed xEndeavour v. AlexanderLove [2025] FCR 12

[End]

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION

xEndeavour
Plaintiff

v.

AlexanderLove
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains that the Defendant has defamed them.

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF

Parts of the statement is objectively false, including assertion of crimes committed.

I. PARTIES
1. xEndeavour
2. Alexanderlove

II. FACTS
1. Defamation is defined in the No More Defamation Act as:
(a) Defamation is a false statement and/or communication that injures a third party's reputation. The tort of defamation includes both libel and slander.

2. Slander is defined in the No More Defamation Act as:
(a) A false statement, usually made through either discord or in-game messages, which defames another person’s reputation, business, profession, or organization.

3. The defendant said the following:

4. The complainant has not been charged nor found guilty of Obstruction of Justice.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. Slanderous comments
2. Damage to reputation - unmeasurable as it was a targeted comment during an electoral campaigning period. The defendant sought to shape a new player's perspective of me and my party by referencing a pending charge that I had no knowledge of, and which I was never found guilty of.
3. Defendant used their office as Solicitor General to obtain and publicly share knowledge that was only available to them in their capacity as Solicitor General. That knowledge was that the Dept. of Justice was seeking to file charges of obstruction of justice, which were later not pursued.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. $40,000 in consequential damages vide Act of Congress - Legal Damages Act. Consequential damages do not require tangible evidence of damages.

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 4th day of February 2025

 

[ColonelKai]

Writ of Summons

@Alexander P. Love is required to appear before the Federal Court in the case of xEndeavour v. AlexanderLove

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.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Present, your honor.

 

[ColonelKai]

Present, your honor.

The defendant has 72 hours beginning now to submit an answer to complaint.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

The defense requests an 8 hour extension.

 

[ColonelKai]

The deadline will be extended to 7AM UTC, or approximately 8 and a half hours from now.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Answer to Complaint

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

xEndeavour
Plaintiff

v.

AlexanderLove
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The defense AFFIRMS facts 1-3.
2. The defense DOES NOT DISPUTE fact 4, adding that just because someone has not YET been charged or found guilty of a crime, that does not mean they did not do the crime.

II. DEFENSES
1. The plaintiff cannot prove the statements are false as the defendant's statements were value judgments based on his interpretation of the law based on his knowledge of the facts at the time.
2. The plaintiff cannot prove any reputational harm or material losses resulting from the statements.
3. The defendant has the right to political communication per the Constitution.


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 8th day of February, 2025.

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


AlexanderLove (Represented by Dragon Law Firm)
Counterplaintiff

v.

xEndeavour
Counterdefendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

xEndeavour's continuous frivolous court case continues to occupy precious time of a busy law firm Managing Partner. I have to take energy away from making money at my firm and use my time as a partner as well as other firm resources to help defend this case.

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

II. FACTS
1. xEndeavour is filing a lawsuit against the managing partner of the biggest law firm on the server.
2. AlexanderLove has to use firm resources, including his own time as a partner, to address this case when he could be making money helping clients.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Legal Damages Act entitles the prevailing party to a minimum of $5,000 or 30% in legal fees. While I am technically self representing, I am doing it in a way where I am losing money due to opportunity cost and I am also borrowing firm resources, that I pay for, to help fend off this case. These could also be deemed compensatory damages if legal damages aren't accepted by the Court.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. 30% of $40,000 is $12,000, so the counterplaintiff seeks $12,000 in legal fees, or compensatory damages if legal fees are not accepted by this Court.


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 8th day of February, 2025.

Motion

Motion to Dismiss

Your honor, the plaintiff cannot show or even substantiate any actual harm to their reputation attributable to my statements. Furthermore, my statements were true to my knowledge as he did provably show screenshots of channels holding a classification message in public. He furthermore failed to comply with questioning by joining the Discord then promptly leaving while not answering any questions, a form of impeding upon the justice process. He may exercise his right to not incriminate himself, but he is still expected to be present for questioning. I therefore move to dismiss under rule 5.5, lack of claim as the case lacks not one but two critical elements. I know he is going to claim appeal exception, but this case is not a repeal. The appeal was already completed and this retrial is only the result of the appeal, it is not the appeal itself. I therefore move to dismiss with prejudice.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Defendant used their office as Solicitor General to obtain and publicly share knowledge that was only available to them in their capacity as Solicitor General. That knowledge was that the Dept. of Justice was seeking to file charges of obstruction of justice, which were later not pursued.

Objection

Perjury, Assumes Facts Not in Evidence

The defendant has not been the Solicitor General any time in recent history.

 

[End]

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS

If there's no reasonable way to determine the exact amount of damages, but harm has clearly occurred, we have a system to answer for this: consequential damages

This case establishes that the defence made a slanderous statement based on information only privy to them as a result of their job at the Dept. of Justice.

You cannot measure political will or reputation, as such, this case asks exclusively for consequential damages.

 

[End]

CORRECTION

The defence was not the Solicitor General, the appear to have worked in the office of the SG as an investigator.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

RESPONSE TO MOTION TO DISMISS

If there's no reasonable way to determine the exact amount of damages, but harm has clearly occurred, we have a system to answer for this: consequential damages

This case establishes that the defence made a slanderous statement based on information only privy to them as a result of their job at the Dept. of Justice.

You cannot measure political will or reputation, as such, this case asks exclusively for consequential damages.

Objection

Breach of Procedure

The plaintiff is speaking out of turn. A response is not warranted.

 

[ColonelKai]

Answer to Complaint

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

xEndeavour
Plaintiff

v.

AlexanderLove
Defendant

I. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
1. The defense AFFIRMS facts 1-3.
2. The defense DOES NOT DISPUTE fact 4, adding that just because someone has not YET been charged or found guilty of a crime, that does not mean they did not do the crime.

II. DEFENSES
1. The plaintiff cannot prove the statements are false as the defendant's statements were value judgments based on his interpretation of the law based on his knowledge of the facts at the time.
2. The plaintiff cannot prove any reputational harm or material losses resulting from the statements.
3. The defendant has the right to political communication per the Constitution.


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 8th day of February, 2025.

Case Filing

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


AlexanderLove (Represented by Dragon Law Firm)
Counterplaintiff

v.

xEndeavour
Counterdefendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:


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

II. FACTS
1. xEndeavour is filing a lawsuit against the managing partner of the biggest law firm on the server.
2. AlexanderLove has to use firm resources, including his own time as a partner, to address this case when he could be making money helping clients.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The Legal Damages Act entitles the prevailing party to a minimum of $5,000 or 30% in legal fees. While I am technically self representing, I am doing it in a way where I am losing money due to opportunity cost and I am also borrowing firm resources, that I pay for, to help fend off this case. These could also be deemed compensatory damages if legal damages aren't accepted by the Court.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. 30% of $40,000 is $12,000, so the counterplaintiff seeks $12,000 in legal fees, or compensatory damages if legal fees are not accepted by this Court.


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 8th day of February, 2025.

Motion

Motion to Dismiss

Your honor, the plaintiff cannot show or even substantiate any actual harm to their reputation attributable to my statements. Furthermore, my statements were true to my knowledge as he did provably show screenshots of channels holding a classification message in public. He furthermore failed to comply with questioning by joining the Discord then promptly leaving while not answering any questions, a form of impeding upon the justice process. He may exercise his right to not incriminate himself, but he is still expected to be present for questioning. I therefore move to dismiss under rule 5.5, lack of claim as the case lacks not one but two critical elements. I know he is going to claim appeal exception, but this case is not a repeal. The appeal was already completed and this retrial is only the result of the appeal, it is not the appeal itself. I therefore move to dismiss with prejudice.

This motion to dismiss has been denied.

The rule requires either that the plaintiff fails to make any claims, or that the evidence was insufficient to support the claim made therein. The court does not believe that the complaint submitted has evidence insufficient enough to dismiss it before the discovery process has begun.

Objection

Perjury, Assumes Facts Not in Evidence

The defendant has not been the Solicitor General any time in recent history.

Objection is overruled. The plaintiff has not provided evidence that the statement was made with malice as perjury requires.

Objection

Breach of Procedure

The plaintiff is speaking out of turn. A response is not warranted.

Objection is sustained. The response was entered without court permission. The statement will be struck from the records.

---

With that, the court shall hereby enter into the Discovery Phase, to last a maximum of 72 hours.

 

[End]

Interrogatory:

1. Have I been charged and or convicted of Obstruction of Justice?

2. If a charge of Obstruction of Justice was pending, then why was it made public knowledge in #politics before I was informed?

3. Did the Defendant use their position within the Dept. Justice to access and publicly distribute this information for political gain in #politics?

4. What is your interpretation of innocent until proven guilty?

 

[End]

Claim to Whistle Blower

I would like to enter the following as evidence as to why I released official information and the legal rationale which allows for such actions:

I shared information from the DCT which was classified at OFFICIAL level.

This information was primarily of:

a. the President ignoring questions from Department leadership
b. proving that the president committed an illegal action
c. that constructors were not being paid.

This information was within the public interest given the president was lying to the public about his actions.

These reasons are consistent with the Whistleblowers Act:
(1) A whistleblower is an entity or individual that presents information to another individual or organization about an entity or individual who is involved with any activity that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, or a waste, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds.

(4) It is illegal for the Government to punish whistle blowers.

As you can see here:

President says he was not the Secretary at the same time as Superior and that he consulted multiple/everyone in leadership. He calls me a liar for calling out such information.

This information shared by me publicly confirms he was Secretary, and that he appointed himself illegally (only one Secretary is permitted by the constitution) and Congress and the public were not informed.

Unity said that he 'told me his legal team was looking' into an illegal action.

Evidence of Unity not replying to concerns raised about stealing FlyingBlocks' property (which was an illegal action by the DCT)

Discord - Group Chat That’s All Fun & Games

No where does he say his legal team is looking into it.

This is why the information was shared, because he was neglecting his department (illegal, waste of taxpayers money), he was unlawfully eminent domaining property (illegal), he was calling me a liar for information which was true (illegal, not in the public interest).

I hope that this extended response and evidence offers you the context as to, with legal reasoning, why I shared classified information.

The court has allowed for the defence to build a case against the complainant by trying to establish a propensity toward criminal behaviour.

C) The two elements here establish foundation to the obstruction of justice. The document leaking directly leads up to the investigation in which the obstruction of justice takes place. The corruption goes to establish propensity toward the criminal behavior of the plaintiff.

As such, I have entered this evidence as to show that my actions were actually legal - despite there being a pending charge which was never pursued (perhaps because the DOJ knew that what I was doing was legal).

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Have I been charged and or convicted of Obstruction of Justice?

Objection

Compound Question

 

[Alexander P. Love]

I shared information from the DCT which was classified at OFFICIAL level.

This information was primarily of:

a. the President ignoring questions from Department leadership
b. proving that the president committed an illegal action
c. that constructors were not being paid.

This information was within the public interest given the president was lying to the public about his actions.

These reasons are consistent with the Whistleblowers Act:
(1) A whistleblower is an entity or individual that presents information to another individual or organization about an entity or individual who is involved with any activity that is deemed illegal, illicit, unsafe, or a waste, fraud, or abuse of taxpayer funds.

(4) It is illegal for the Government to punish whistle blowers.

As you can see here:

President says he was not the Secretary at the same time as Superior and that he consulted multiple/everyone in leadership. He calls me a liar for calling out such information.

Objection

Breach of Procedure and Improper Evidence

The plaintiff has decided to vomit a bunch of text in discovery. They may attach exhibits but may not deliver their opening yet. I move to strike the entire post due to the text AND due to the fact the exhibits aren't properly labelled.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

What is your interpretation of innocent until proven guilty?

Objection

Calls for Conclusion and Narrative

This is just an opinion question with no bearing on the case.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

2. If a charge of Obstruction of Justice was pending, then why was it made public knowledge in #politics before I was informed?

3. Did the Defendant use their position within the Dept. Justice to access and publicly distribute this information for political gain in #politics?

2. Citizens have the right to know when their politicians are crooks such as yourself.

3. Joins and leaves are public knowledge, so no. I merely interpreted publicly available knowledge.

 

[End]

Citizens have the right to know when their politicians are crooks such as yourself.

I'd like to add the following remark to my claims for relief

 

[End]

Objection

Calls for Conclusion and Narrative

This is just an opinion question with no bearing on the case.

I will reframe the question:

When you formed your opinion and made public comment based on pending charges about the plaintiff, were you keeping in mind that they are presumed innocent until proven guilty?

 

[End]

Objection

Compound Question

I will reframe:

Have I been charged with Obstruction of Justice, specifically in relation to the charges which were pending with the Department of Justice?

Have I been found guilty of Obstruction of Justice, specifically in relation to the charges which were pending with the Department of Justice?

 

[End]

@Alexander P. Love

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Have I been charged with Obstruction of Justice, specifically in relation to the charges which were pending with the Department of Justice?

Have I been found guilty of Obstruction of Justice, specifically in relation to the charges which were pending with the Department of Justice?

DOJ members don't get access to your criminal record like DHS employees do so I have no idea what specific offenses you have or have not been charged with or found guilty of in the past.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

@Alexander P. Love

Objection

Breach of Procedure and Motion to Strike

 

[Alexander P. Love]

When you formed your opinion and made public comment based on pending charges about the plaintiff, were you keeping in mind that they are presumed innocent until proven guilty?

I indeed formed an opinion and publicly stated it regardless of that presumption; I wasn't in Court and it isn't my job to consider "innocent until proven guilty" as a mere civilian in that capacity.

Motion

Motion to Dismiss

Your honor, the plaintiff has just admitted that the comments in question are based on opinion, which inherently have no truth value to them (see Bardiya_King & JustaDumpling v. CrackedAmoeba1). Because defamatory statements must be false, and an opinion cannot be false, there is no claim. I therefore move to dismiss the plaintiff's claim under rule 5.5, and proceed to summary judgment on the counterclaim.

 

[End]

Your honour, the defence is objecting to everything and its disrupting the case.

They have even objected to me pinging them noting we have a short period for discovery and where they did not reply.

The fact of the matter is that the defendant has made slanderous comments. My line of questioning into their ability to interpret legal concepts like innocent until proven guilty is not grounds for dismissal.

 

[ColonelKai]

Objection

Compound Question

Objection sustained.

Objection

Breach of Procedure and Improper Evidence

The plaintiff has decided to vomit a bunch of text in discovery. They may attach exhibits but may not deliver their opening yet. I move to strike the entire post due to the text AND due to the fact the exhibits aren't properly labelled.

Objection sustained.

Objection

Calls for Conclusion and Narrative

This is just an opinion question with no bearing on the case.

Objection sustained.

Objection

Breach of Procedure and Motion to Strike

Objection overruled. While not explicitly in the procedures, I do not believe this is disruptive to the court. The court does recommend and urge everyone to include appropriate pings within their original message, though.

Your honour, the defence is objecting to everything and its disrupting the case.

They have even objected to me pinging them noting we have a short period for discovery and where they did not reply.

The fact of the matter is that the defendant has made slanderous comments. My line of questioning into their ability to interpret legal concepts like innocent until proven guilty is not grounds for dismissal.

This will be struck as it is out of order as it is lacking any label as a submission to the court. Consider this your warning.

I apologise for the delay as I was traveling from Japan to East Coast USA in the last couple days. The court will go into a short recess pending a decision on the motion to dismiss. I understand this is a bit unorthodox but I need this time to due aforementioned reasons.

 

[End]

DOJ members don't get access to your criminal record like DHS employees do so I have no idea what specific offenses you have or have not been charged with or found guilty of in the past.

This was not the question asked of you, you were asked whether the charge which was pending progressed to a charge or conviction.

Please answer the question appropriately, and not providing an answer which is irrelevant (i.e. answering based on my criminal record)

 

[End]

I will reframe the question:

When you formed your opinion and made public comment based on pending charges about the plaintiff, were you keeping in mind that they are presumed innocent until proven guilty?

This question remains outstanding, you still have not answered a question which seeks to understand why you made a statement about a pending charge as if the plaintiff had been found guilty.

 

[End]

Your honour, I request that you compel the defence to respond to the pending questions once the recess is over.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

This was not the question asked of you, you were asked whether the charge which was pending progressed to a charge or conviction.

Please answer the question appropriately, and not providing an answer which is irrelevant (i.e. answering based on my criminal record)

Objection

Argumentative

I answered the question exactly as the plaintiff asked it. He has no more questions remaining and he is attempting to use out of turn statements to harass me.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Your honour, I request that you compel the defence to respond to the pending questions once the recess is over.

Objection

Breach of Procedure

This is not formatted as a motion or objection per court procedures.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

This question remains outstanding, you still have not answered a question which seeks to understand why you made a statement about a pending charge as if the plaintiff had been found guilty.

Objection

Argumentative and Breach of Procedure

I answered the question, just above the motion to dismiss. It may not be to End’s liking, but I told the truth.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

I'd like to add the following remark to my claims for relief

Objection

Breach of Procedure

The plaintiff cannot amend their filing on that date as discovery ended before that post.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

3. The defendant said the following:

Objection

Breach of Procedure

I just noticed that the exhibits are not labelled properly, or even at all. This evidence must be struck according to the procedures, upheld by Pepecuu v. MrEntomology.

The defence was not the Solicitor General, the appear to have worked in the office of the SG as an investigator.

Objection

Breach of Procedure

Tthe exhibit is not labelled properly, or even at all. This evidence in this post must be struck according to the procedures, upheld by Pepecuu v. MrEntomology.

Motion

Motion to Dismiss

The plaintiff has no valid evidence. I move to dismiss the case under rule 5.5 as they lack evidence to substantiate any claim or fact. I move to have summary judgment on the counterclaim.

 

[End]

Your honour, I have stipulated many times that this case is about perceived damages to reputation which cannot be tangibly measured, hence why I am seeking only consequential damages.

There is clearly harm caused in the evidence provided by way of weaponising knowledge that the defence only knew by virtue of their position in the Dept. Justice. They used this non-public information for political gain, of which, was not true and misrepresented facts of a pending charge which was not filed nor pursued.

The Defence has spent most of this case obstructing questioning and dodging questions to extend the period beyond discovery.

 

[ColonelKai]

@End as you have already been warned, and have continued the behaviour of unsolicited and out of order comments within the courtroom, the court hereby finds it appropriate that the plaintiff be charged with one charge of Contempt of Court, and instruct the DHS to carry out the appropriate punishment at their discretion.

That being said,

Objection

Breach of Procedure

I just noticed that the exhibits are not labelled properly, or even at all. This evidence must be struck according to the procedures, upheld by Pepecuu v. MrEntomology.

Objection

Breach of Procedure

Tthe exhibit is not labelled properly, or even at all. This evidence in this post must be struck according to the procedures, upheld by Pepecuu v. MrEntomology.

Motion

Motion to Dismiss

The plaintiff has no valid evidence. I move to dismiss the case under rule 5.5 as they lack evidence to substantiate any claim or fact. I move to have summary judgment on the counterclaim.

The two objections within are hereby sustained, and the case is dismissed without prejudice.

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT
xEndeavour v. AlexanderLove [2025] FCR 12


AlexanderLove (Represented by Dragon Law Firm)
Counterplaintiff

v.

xEndeavour
Counterdefendant


I. COUNTERPLAINTIFF'S POSITION
1. The counterplaintiff claims that the case is frivolous and the time used to defend against it is damages which should be reimbursed through the appropriate legal venue.

II. COUNTERDEFENDANT'S POSITION
1. N/A

III. THE COURT OPINION
The court finds it that the counterplaintiff has not demonstrated the necessary components of frivolous lawsuits to the court, and therefore has not a right to recover any damages arising from the acts of the counterdefendant as listed.

IV. DECISION
All prayers are hereby dismissed.

The Federal Court thanks all involved.