Louisistan
•
Legislator
Posts: 573
Likes: 66
Gender: Male
Nation: The Spirit of Louisistan
Discord ID: Louisistan#9874
|
Post by Louisistan on Nov 26, 2021 9:18:55 GMT -5
1. Name of Plaintiff: Louisistan
2. Name of Defendant: 3. Please explain very briefly what the case is about:
Plaintiffs, in their respective capacity as eligible Election Supervisors, failed to provide a place to nominate candidates for the November 2021 Legislature election as required by section 5 of the Elections Act in conjunction with section 7 of the constitution of Spiritus
4. Which of your legal right(s) do you believe has been violated?:
The right to vote for Legislature.
5. What remedy are you seeking (leave blank if unsure):
An election be held.
6. Does any evidence in this case need to be submitted in private because it is classified or highly personal?:
No.
|
|
|
Rogamark
•
Chief Executive
Posts: 736
Likes: 73
Gender: Male
Discord ID: Rogamark#1427
|
Post by Rogamark on Nov 26, 2021 10:07:22 GMT -5
Before the Court is an enforcement action against the Election Supervisors. Being one of them, and thus a named party to the lawsuit, I'm recusing myself from the case. The Hon. Ltin as the senior nonrecused member of the Court will deal with this.
|
|
|
Ltin
•
Chief Justice
Posts: 243
Likes: 18
Gender: Male
Nation: Ltin Corporation
|
Post by Ltin on Nov 26, 2021 13:37:08 GMT -5
The case is accepted and before the court. The Honorable Ltin presiding. The plaintiff, Louisistan, alleges that November elections were not held in accordance with the elections act.
The court has jurisdiction, as this is a matter concerning the Elections Act. As a citizen with a right to vote and run in elections, Louisistan clearly has standing.
Since this is an elections dispute, let's try to make this somewhat expedited. Parties will have until 1AM GMT, November 30th 2021, to file any preliminary motions and decide who will represent them. Any party which does not respond by that deadline will be presumed to be representing themselves.
Additionally, the court notes that the defendants are all being sued in their capacity as election supervisors, and as such effectively as a group. However, the court also requests that the plaintiff explain why each individual defendant should be a party in this case.
|
|
|
Rogamark
•
Chief Executive
Posts: 736
Likes: 73
Gender: Male
Discord ID: Rogamark#1427
|
Post by Rogamark on Nov 26, 2021 13:51:07 GMT -5
Thank you, Your Honor. I shall be representing myself.
I move to be dismissed as a party from the lawsuit on the grounds that I was not available to serve as Election Supervisor for the election in question. I was traveling in the first week of November, and I announced that at least twice in advance. I cannot have failed to conduct an election that was not mine to conduct in the first place due to a leave of absence, and thus I am not a proper party to this lawsuit.
|
|
|
TimS
•
Citizen
Posts: 219
Likes: 23
|
Post by TimS on Nov 26, 2021 13:56:00 GMT -5
May it please the Court, I am making a motion to dismiss the case against me specifically with prejudice for the following reasons:
1. I am not now nor have I ever been in one of the positions eligible to be the Election Supervisor under the Elections Act.
2. As such, at no time did I ever have the power to begin any election in November.
3. Further, since I cannot start elections I would not be able to provide the relief requested by the Plaintiff.
4. Lastly, I believe my inclusion was a simple error to begin with.
Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sovreignry on Nov 26, 2021 15:26:14 GMT -5
Your Honor, I shall represent myself.
I move to dismiss the action as moot, as elections have now commenced.
|
|
|
Louisistan
•
Legislator
Posts: 573
Likes: 66
Gender: Male
Nation: The Spirit of Louisistan
Discord ID: Louisistan#9874
|
Post by Louisistan on Nov 26, 2021 15:51:08 GMT -5
Your honor, I will be representing myself
Plaintiffs Rogamark, Salaxalans, Wuufu, Tim and Sovreigny were named because they are forum administrators (https://spiritusns.proboards.com/members?group=1&view=group)
Plaintiffs Salaxalans and Feirmont were named because they are Delegate and Chief Executive respectively.
These are the people named by the elections act as being able to serve as election supervisors.
Plaintiff TimS was named by mistake and I join his motion to dismiss the case against him specifically.
|
|
|
Ltin
•
Chief Justice
Posts: 243
Likes: 18
Gender: Male
Nation: Ltin Corporation
|
Post by Ltin on Nov 26, 2021 22:34:29 GMT -5
The motion filed by TimS is granted. As TimS is not an election supervisor, he cannot violate any provisions imposing requirements on election supervisors, nor provide the remedy requested by the plaintiff. The case against TimS is dismissed with prejudice.
|
|
|
Rogamark
•
Chief Executive
Posts: 736
Likes: 73
Gender: Male
Discord ID: Rogamark#1427
|
Post by Rogamark on Nov 28, 2021 0:14:30 GMT -5
May it please the Court, I join in Sov's motion to dismiss as moot, and file a concurrent motion to dismiss for want of remedy at law.
The remedy requested by Plaintiff is that the Court direct the Election Supervisors to hold the missed election. Election Supervisor Sovreignry, one of the named parties, has since proceeded to do just that voluntarily. That leaves Plaintiff without an ongoing violation that could be remedied by a lawsuit, and the Court without an available remedy to grant or deny. At best Plaintiff could argue that it violated his rights that the election was not held on time, but there is nothing the Court can do about that.
|
|
|
Louisistan
•
Legislator
Posts: 573
Likes: 66
Gender: Male
Nation: The Spirit of Louisistan
Discord ID: Louisistan#9874
|
Post by Louisistan on Nov 28, 2021 15:42:40 GMT -5
Your honour, I hope it is not out of order for me to comment on motions brought forth by plaintiffs. I ask that the motion to dismiss the case be denied. While it is obviously correct that an election is now being held and the remedy I have named is thus already in place, I maintain that my rights were violated in that the election supervisors did not open the nominations in the timeframe mandated by the elections act. While I regretfully understand that the court is unable to provide a time machine to rectify this, I still wish for this violation to be held on record. Not out of spite but rather so that we have a binding ruling that November 26th is distinctly not "the beginning of November" and thus hopefully ensure that this unfortunate happenstance is not repeated.
Moreover, I ask that the court deny the motion to dismiss Rogamark as party to this lawsuit. As I understand, the potential election supervisors decide collegially amongst themselves who will supervise what election. Seeing as this procedure is essentially unregulated, I ask that all potential election supervisors stand as plaintiffs for now.
|
|
|
Rogamark
•
Chief Executive
Posts: 736
Likes: 73
Gender: Male
Discord ID: Rogamark#1427
|
Post by Rogamark on Nov 28, 2021 17:19:29 GMT -5
I would respectfully request that my right honorable friend explains how finding that November 26th is not the "beginning of November" remedies an alleged past violation. He can't sue over hypothetical future violations as they have not occurred yet, nor is the lawsuit even alleging a pattern that might warrant action with effect for the future. The remedy Plaintiff requested was that "An election be held". An election - namely, the one we forgot - is now being held. The exact remedy he requested has already materialized, and as he himself concedes, without a time machine there is nothing further the Court can order. That's two (2) reasons for dismissal for the price of one.
As for the reply to my motion to dismiss me as a party, Plaintiff is correct that the Election Supervisors decide amongst themselves who conducts an election. In fairness, in light of Plaintiff's explanations, and mindful that the Supreme Court of Spiritus should be readily available to nonlawyer plaintiffs, I'm willing to concede that he is suing the Election Supervisors collectively rather than individually. My brain isn't working at peak efficiency right now and I forgot where I was going with this, so I'll just stop talking for now. I guess the gist was just that I won't withdraw my motion, but I don't really care about it anymore either because Plaintiff has enough of a point that the Court could logically go either way.
|
|
|
Louisistan
•
Legislator
Posts: 573
Likes: 66
Gender: Male
Nation: The Spirit of Louisistan
Discord ID: Louisistan#9874
|
Post by Louisistan on Nov 29, 2021 10:40:32 GMT -5
Your honour,
the Procedural Rules of this court require that
It does not require that the violation be ongoing, it does not require a remedy be available.
Under the standard proposed by the Right Honourable and Learned Gentleman, my rights can be violated at any time without recourse, as long as the violator makes sure that there is no remedy available. I do not believe this to be a desirable standard.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sovreignry on Nov 29, 2021 16:31:31 GMT -5
I will be representing Salaxalans in this case.
|
|
|
TimS
•
Citizen
Posts: 219
Likes: 23
|
Post by TimS on Nov 29, 2021 17:55:15 GMT -5
I will be representing Feirmont and Wuufu. We also join the motions of Sovreignry and Rogamark to dismiss.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sovreignry on Nov 29, 2021 19:34:02 GMT -5
My client will also join in the motions to dismiss.
|
|
|