Jump to content
Blanco

Dinoco LTD v Los Santos County Government [11/28]

Recommended Posts

* James Reed walks into the courtroom, dressed in a seemingly expensive suit, fixing his tie upon entrance as he checks the time on his phone for a moment prior to sitting down at the nearest seat to the right side *

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* A letter would be placed on the desk of the Justice by the Bailiff on request of Steven Spade*

 

Spoiler

sorAckr.png&key=fef1f72053424041890890ac

 

Your Honor,

 

The Defendant (The Consilium Populisque Los Santos) hereby files a motion for dismissal on grounds that the complaint put forward by Dinoco Ltd. has failed to state a claim.

That is to say, that the plaintiff has failed to include any factual elements needed for a specific cause of action from any kind of legally recognized constitution, statute, judicial precedent, or administrative regulations. Therefore, even if the evidence they have presented is true, there is no basis for a legal remedy to be reached based upon their claims.

 

The Defense to this point, sees the complaint against The Consilium Populisque Los Santos as nothing more than an attempt to stall a constitutionally validated process.

 

Regards,

Steven Spade

District Attorney for the County of Los Santos. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Scott Murphy enters the courtroom, taking a seat in the viewing gallery*

Edited by Restrepo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Rose Moreno would enter the courtroom, as she’d take a brief look around before she’d quietly walk over towards Namira, before she’d sit herself next to her nodding lightly before she’d turn her sight towards the judge.* 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Mitchel Martinez enters the courtroom taking a seat in the gallery.*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Billy Mercado smokes one of his Camel cigarettes outside the Court of San Andreas nodding to each of the people as they enter. Once Billy has finished his cigarette he enters the courtroom heading over to the bench taking a seat.*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**Huw Edward enters the room, as he takes a seat at the plaintiff's desk**

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Alex Huggins enters the room taking a look around before proceeding towards the viewing gallery, taking a seat beside Valentin.*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*Justice MacIntyre enters the room, taking his seat before reviewing the documents handed to him and banging his gavel.*

 

"Very well, Mister Krakowski. You have failed to show which law you believe the Government has broken in your evidence. Eminent Domain is protected in our Constitution and from the evidence provided by yourself, the government have fulfilled the Just Compensation Requirement. Now unless you can provide evidence showing that this building has more market value than the value that was given then this case will be dismissed. Your other two demands are not what this court is for so they will be dismissed also. 

 

So unless further evidence can be given, this case will be dismissed.

 

*Justice MacIntyre peers at both parties, awaiting a response.*

 

(( @Blanco @Zebulon ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your Honor,

 

The Defense looks to you to sustain the motion of dismissal based on failure to state a claim for reasons previously stated.

 

As far as the compensation, the Plaintiff has again failed to display any precedence whereby a body enacting eminent domain is liable for claims of revenue loss. The Consilium Populisque Los Santos is not buying the business, simply acquiring the physical property which it inhabits. The County Government has already offered above market value compensation to the Plaintiff in these regards.

 

If the Plaintiff has measurable claims further on, they are welcome to file a separate claim for revenue loss, if at that time, they are able to substantiate a claim.

 

Continuation of this process is frivolous. In response, the Defense will be filing a counter-claim."

 

*The Bailiff would be presented with a count-claim document.*

 

Spoiler

ybpo8xbw

SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

 

 


 

Motion for Sanctions

Court of San Andreas, District of Los Santos

 

The Consilium Populisque Los Santos

 

Versus

 

Dinoco LTD

 

Subpart 1. Accusation.

 

In the matter of this petition, The Consilium Populisque Los Santos on the 30th of November, 2018, accuses Dinoco LTD of:

  • Breach of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
    • Rule 11 - b(2)
      • By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper—whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it—an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances: the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law

Subpart 2. Demands.

 

The plaintiff, The Consilium Populisque Los Santos demands the following:

  • $20,000.00 USD in Attorney's Fees
  • Immediate Injunction Against Further Frivolous Claims

 

Subpart 3. Declaration.

I, Steven Spade, affirm that the foregoing is accurate and true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

 

(( @EvilScotsman @Blanco ))

Edited by Zebulon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your Honor,

 

The Plaintiff's legal counsel simply does not understand that their 'hopes of accomplishment' are not rooted in any tangible legal principles, precedence, statutes, or otherwise recognized laws. 

 

This is a literal enactment of a frivolous suit Your Honor for which the Defense seeks injunction, and the attorney representing their client in this fashion should be reprimanded.

 

Again under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:(c)(1):

 

 If, Rule 11(b) has been violated, the court may impose an appropriate sanction on any attorney, law firm, or party that violated the rule or is responsible for the violation.

 

(( @EvilScotsman @Blanco ))

Edited by Zebulon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your Honor,

If the Plaintiff would now like to claim that they are arguing for "extending, modifying, or reversing existing law", the Defense would motion to dismiss on grounds of this court holding a lack of subject matter jurisdiction over the Supreme Court of the United States, who has ruled, in cases such as Berman v. Parker  that "the acquisition and the assembly of real property and the leasing or sale thereof for redevelopment pursuant to a project area redevelopment plan . . . is hereby declared to be a public use."

The Defense wishes this court to revert it's attention to the Motion for Sanctions filed earlier Your Honor."

(( @EvilScotsman @Blanco ))

 


 

Edited by Zebulon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your Honor,

 

If you look at the case supplied by the defense, "Berman v. Parker," you can see that the court ruling was contingent on the fact that legislation was passed prior to any eminent domain proceedings being conducted. The court decision listed the passing of the legislation as a means of showing public use.

 

Thus the Berman v. Parker case is not comparable, seeming as there was no legislation passed nor any information given about the public use of the property prior to any eminent domain proceedings. If such proceedings were conducted prior to any action being taken against the plaintiff, we would concede that the public use section of Eminent Domain has been achieved but not the Just Compensation section.

 

To reiterate, the Berman v. Parker decision used the passing of legislation prior to any proceedings as fulfilling the public use section of Eminent Domain, which was not done in this case."

 

(( @EvilScotsman @Zebulon ))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Your Honor,

 

Again, the Plaintiff is rambling on about subject matter in which they posses minimal comprehension...

 

In Berman v Parker it was determined that "The concept of the public welfare is broad and inclusive....The values it represents are spiritual as well as physical, aesthetic as well as monetary. It is within the power of the legislature to determine that..." 

 

Ergo, it is fully within the authority of the Defendant to determine the parameters of public welfare, and apply them justly.

 

The Defense again asks Your Honor to review the Motion for Sanctions before this case proceeds to waste anymore of this court's time."

 

(( @EvilScotsman @Blanco ))

Edited by Zebulon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and follow our Guidelines.