Lawsuit: Dismissed xlayzur v. Commonwealth of Redmont [2021] SCR 12

[Alexander P. Love]

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


xlayzur
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE PLAINTIFF
Today, a candidate with 199 hours of playtime was DQ'ed from a mayor election, though it requires 192 hours of playtime. We are suing as the Constitution never says the playtime has to be active.

I. PARTIES
1. xlayzur (Plaintiff)
2. AlexanderLove (Attorney)
3. The Department of State

II. FACTS
1. xlayzur declared intention to contest the election for Mayor of Hamilton.
2. He has 199 hours of playtime, shown in tab, and the requirement to run for Mayor is 192 hours. The evidence below displays the Plaintiff's playtime, as seen through tab.
3. The DoS failed to include the plaintiff on the ballot for the mayoral elections.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. The law states that mayors need 192 hours of playtime to run for Mayor.
2. The Constitution and these laws never specify that playtime must be *active* playtime.
3. The Plaintiff has the requisite playtime of 192 hours (199) even if it is not all active playtime.

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
The Plaintiff seeks the following from the Defendant:
1. For xlayzur to be included on the Mayoral ballot and for the elections to be restarted.

THE PLAINTIFF IS REQUESTING AN EMERGENCY INJUNCTION for the Mayor Elections to be frozen until this case is adjourned.

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 22nd day of June, 2021

 

[Westray]

After discussing with my colleagues on the court, and with Hon. Justice MilkCrack, the Supreme Court has decided to grant an alternative emergency injunction. We have deliberated and discussed a range of options. Currently, there is no way to fairly re-add the Plaintiff to the polls, and we find that stopping the election mid-voting would be irreparable to the democratic system.

The Supreme Court hereby orders the Department of State to postpone the Mayoral election results until this case has been concluded. While voting will continue, no official results should be released until we know whether the Plaintiff legally should or shouldn't have been on such ballot.

With such in mind, I ask that each party in this case provides responses and arguments within an adequately reasonable timeframe, expressing the urgency of preventing a lengthy delay of any result.

 

[Westray]

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

The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of the xlayzur v. The Commonwealth of Redmont. Failure to appear within 72 hours, or this summons will result in a default judgment.

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.​

 

[Alexander P. Love]

If the defendant agrees, I would love to conduct an in-game trial.

 

[Canxx01]

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
MOTION TO DISMISS

xlayzur
Plaintiff

v.

The Commonwealth of Redmont
Defendant

MOTION TO DISMISS
Defendant move that the complaint in this case be dismissed, and in support thereof, respectfully alleges:

1. The Department of State's testimony, and reasoning behind denying the Plaintiff access to the ballot indicates that The Plaintiff did, in fact, not meet the criteria for running as a mayor.

The Commonwealth believes this is a case of facts, and the fact is solid without a shadow of a doubt that the plaintiff did not have the required amount.

Therefore, the Commonwealth wishes to dismiss this case.

Given the affidavit from two members of the Department of State + evidence gathered from a staff ticket, the Commonwealth wishes that they are sufficient to the Court that a motion to dismiss is necessitated.

DATED: This 24 day of June 2021

 

[Westray]

The motion to dismiss has been rejected, however, the Supreme Court has decided on some aspects of the case based on such information presented.

It is the unanimous opinion that if the only way the Department of State has been able to properly review playtime has been based on /info, and they have applied that requirement to every person in such election equally, the Plaintiff does not retain the right to be included in such ballot. With that in mind, we are hereby rescinding the injunction order, and allowing the Department of State to release the official results as per usual.

The Supreme Court does however, find that the lack of disclosure by the Department of State, to clarify what type of playtime has been counted, could potentially constitute civil damages over campaigning costs. In such, we will allow the Plaintiff to either rescind or amend their complaint.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

Your honor, the Plaintiff will have a decision on this matter soon.

 

[Westray]

Given it has been 3 days since such was asked, I will be arranging a timeframe. Please provide the amended complaint within 48 hours.

 

[Alexander P. Love]

The Plaintiff will be dropping this case. Thank you for your time.

 

[Westray]

This case is hereby dismissed at the request of the Plaintiff.