Lawsuit: Adjourned Plura72 v. Dearev

@BabySoga4real, would the Defendant agree to a 50-hour extension to discovery? You have 12 hours to agree or disagree with the extension.

Due to the 12-hour response time limitation, discovery will be temporarily extended to 3.15 pm UTC on April 18th, 2025, which is approximately 12 hours from now.
Your Honor,
We agree to Plura72's request.
 
Your Honor,
We agree to Plura72's request.
1744951622848.png
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF ALEXANDRIA
COURT DECISION ON EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY IN 'Plura72 v. Dearev, Case 3 (Mag. Ct., 2025)'

Seeing as the Defendant agrees to a 50-hour extension to discovery proposed by the Plaintiff, the extension will be granted, and discovery will now end at 18:00 UTC on April 20th, 2025 (Approximately 61 hours from now).
 
View attachment 31
IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF ALEXANDRIA
COURT DECISION ON EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY IN 'Plura72 v. Dearev, Case 3 (Mag. Ct., 2025)'

Seeing as the Defendant agrees to a 50-hour extension to discovery proposed by the Plaintiff, the extension will be granted, and discovery will now end at 18:00 UTC on April 20th, 2025 (Approximately 61 hours from now).
Your Honor,
May we post Motions already so they can we reviewed after the end of discovery
 
Your Honor,
May we post Motions already so they can we reviewed after the end of discovery
What motions would the defendant like to introduce? If they are objections and/or writs relating to what the plaintiff has said or done within this court case, you may do so.
 
What motions would the defendant like to introduce? If they are objections and/or writs relating to what the plaintiff has said or done within this court case, you may do so.
Honorable Magistrate,
We would like to first ask for an ingame Trial.
 

1744951622848.png


IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF ALEXANDRIA
CONTEMPT CHARGES AGAINST PLAINTIFF IN 'Plura72 v. Dearev, Case 3 (Mag. Ct., 2025)'

The Plaintiff, @Plura72, explicitly requested and was granted a 50-hour extension to compile and present evidence; however, they failed to make any such submission within the extended period. Furthermore, the Plaintiff did not respond to the Defendant’s request for an in-game trial resolution before the given deadline, demonstrating a disregard for Court Rules and Procedures.

In light of this conduct, the Court finds the Plaintiff in Contempt of Court on two counts:
(1) Failure to produce evidence in discovery, despite being granted an extension.
(2) Failure to answer the Defendant’s queries within the allotted timeframe.

CHARGES
The Magistrate Court takes note of the Plaintiff’s continued disregard for the integrity of these proceedings, where the Plaintiff has a history of such conduct, as previously observed in Plura72 v. Ministry of Construction, Case No. 3 (Ch. 2025).

Accordingly, we charge the Plaintiff £500 for the initial contempt of not providing evidence in discovery despite the granted extension, and an additional £1000 for repeated refusal to follow Court Rules and Procedures.

The total fine levied upon the Plaintiff for the two contempt charges shall be £1500.
 
Last edited:
1744951622848.png

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF ALEXANDRIA
OFFICIAL WARNING TO PLAINTIFF IN 'Plura72 v. Dearev, Case 3 (Mag. Ct., 2025)'

This Court is growing increasingly intolerant of the Plaintiff’s (@Plura72) blatant disregard for the judicial process. This is not your personal stage for theatrics; this is a court of law, and it demands respect, diligence, and cooperation. Your continued silence and evasion not only obstruct the fair administration of justice, but also shows a complete disrespect for the Magistrates Court’s authority.

If you do not provide a clear and satisfactory explanation for your failure to participate in the discovery process within 24 (TWENTY-FOUR) hours, you will be met with additional contempt charges, an immediate dismissal of this case with prejudice, and a formal recommendation to the Chancery Court of Alexandria to bar you from filing any further civil lawsuits in this jurisdiction.

Let this serve as your final warning. The patience of this Court is not infinite, and you are rapidly exhausting what little remains.
 
Last edited:
ENTREATY OF DISMISSAL

Lack of legal standing

To the Magastrates Honorable Court,

The Defense respectfully moves for dismissal of the complaint in the Plura72 v. Dearev, pursuant to the grounds stated below:

1. They have been deported from SC and DC, therefore they dont have legal standing and also they have been deported from the forums so they cant respond here.

2. Furthermore, we ask for legal fees from the Plaintiff we ask for a standard 30% of the Case value as legal fees.

Respectfully submitted,

B.Soga
Defense Counsel for Dearev

Dated: April, 21, 2025
 
ENTREATY OF DISMISSAL

Lack of legal standing

To the Magastrates Honorable Court,

The Defense respectfully moves for dismissal of the complaint in the Plura72 v. Dearev, pursuant to the grounds stated below:

1. They have been deported from SC and DC, therefore they dont have legal standing and also they have been deported from the forums so they cant respond here.

2. Furthermore, we ask for legal fees from the Plaintiff we ask for a standard 30% of the Case value as legal fees.

Respectfully submitted,

B.Soga
Defense Counsel for Dearev

Dated: April, 21, 2025
Just to confirm, are they permanently deported or temporarily deported, and if temporarily deported, how many days?
 
Just to confirm, are they permanently deported or temporarily deported, and if temporarily deported, how many days?
Honorable Magistrate,
They changed there announcement in their Parties Discord from them being deported to Naezaretheus being deported. We wish that if they weren't deported our Motion be dismissed.
 
ENTREATY OF DISMISSAL
Lack of Appearance

To the Magistrates Honorable Court,

The Defense respectfully moves for dismissal of the complaint in the Plura72 v. Dearev, pursuant to the grounds stated below:

1. The Plaintiff has failed to appear and participate in the proceedings, this shouldn't be accepted by the Court.
2. Furthermore, we ask for legal fees from the Plaintiff; we ask for a standard 30% of the Case value as legal fees.

Respectfully submitted,
B.Soga
Defense Counsel for Dearev
Dated: April 21, 2025
 
Honorable Magistrate,
They changed there announcement in their Parties Discord from them being deported to Naezaretheus being deported. We wish that if they weren't deported our Motion be dismissed.
Given their announcement, the confusion on who is deported is understandable. At the Defence's request, their 2nd entreaty of dismissal has been denied, due to unintentional incorrect information.
 
ENTREATY OF DISMISSAL
Lack of Appearance

To the Magistrates Honorable Court,

The Defense respectfully moves for dismissal of the complaint in the Plura72 v. Dearev, pursuant to the grounds stated below:

1. The Plaintiff has failed to appear and participate in the proceedings, this shouldn't be accepted by the Court.
2. Furthermore, we ask for legal fees from the Plaintiff; we ask for a standard 30% of the Case value as legal fees.

Respectfully submitted,
B.Soga
Defense Counsel for Dearev
Dated: April 21, 2025
The Court shall split the 3rd Entreaty of Dismissal by the Defendant into 2 parts: The dismissal itself, and the countersuit for legal fees.

I. THE DISMISSAL
The 3rd dismissal by the Defendant shall be denied by the Court, as the reason of "Lack of Appearance" despite being true due to the evident lack of communication by the Plaintiff since 6:33pm UTC April 17th, 2025, however "Lack of Appearance" is not a valid reason for a dismissal, as the Entreaty of Dismissal will have to follow the Court Rules and Procedures for a Dismissal. Moreover, the Court has stated in the official warning above that it will give 24 hours (Approximately 21.5 hours remaining as of now) for the Plaintiff to "provide a clear and satisfactory explanation" to their lack of communication in this case, granting this dismissal will infringe on the Plaintiff's right to respond to the warning, where response by the Plaintiff was authorized and is expected.

II. THE COUNTERSUIT
The countersuit shall be granted, and the Court shall rule on it. During adjournment, the Court shall also provide a separate verdict for the countersuit, in addition to a verdict for the original complaint set out by the Plaintiff.
 
Last edited:
Honorable Magistrate,
The Plaintiff has accepted a settlement offer for 0 Pounds. We wish to proceed with the Countersuit though.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20250421_125039_Discord.jpg
    Screenshot_20250421_125039_Discord.jpg
    140.7 KB · Views: 12
Honorable Magistrate,
The Plaintiff has accepted a settlement offer for 0 Pounds. We wish to proceed with the Countersuit though.
Thank you for letting the Court know. The Court will now be in recess, pending a final verdict for the complaint and the countersuit.
 
1744951622848.png


IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF ALEXANDRIA
COURT VERDICT IN 'Plura72 v. Dearev, Case 3 (Mag. Ct., 2025)'
I. PLAINTIFF'S POSITION
- The Defendant
made the Plaintiff's experience in Alexandria worse by violating the (at that point, not yet enacted) Alexandrian Criminal Code.
- The death of the Plaintiff at the hands of the Defendant resulted in the loss of the Plaintiff's inventory items.

II. DEFENDANT'S POSITION
- The Plaintiff fails to demonstrate that the Defendant violated the Alexandrian Criminal Code or the Constitution.
- The Plaintiff's claims lack basis as the Plaintiff can't lose items through a death, due to in-game mechanics.
- The Plaintiff fails to provide any evidence supporting any of their claims for relief.

III. COURT OPINION
Seeing as the Plaintiff and the Defendant have come to an amicable resolution by settlement and no further disputes are raised, the case of Plura72 v. Dearev, Case 3 (Mag. Ct., 2025) is dismissed with prejudice.

The Court thanks all parties involved.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top