F3rri5 v damonchase 2025 Civ 3

Plaintiff	Olive (awesome_olive)
Plaintiff's attorney	Ferris (f3rri5_)
Defendant	Pt4o (damonchase) [Now "antimuggy"]
Defendant's attorney	Aerospace Enjoyer (busiedcomb)
Courtroom	#public-court-6
Judge	Heinrich (heinrich0772)
Civil Complaint	CC
Evidence	Evidence
Settlement	Settlement

Summary

Chief Archivist Ferris' Notes: See the linked courtroom for detailed logs

Opening Statement (Plaintiff)

Your honour, the plaintiff would like to begin by submitting the following document as evidence https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hdz_Ufz7oUgll-aT-1twHpBnZe69RxZ1UMpGEOO7h54/edit?usp=sharing.

With regards to relevant context, my client, Olive, is the owner of the business known as "Peoples Bank".

In a conversation with my client, the defendant (Hereafter "pt4o") requested my client to close all accounts under his name as they were not authorised by him, that is impossible since there were no accounts. My client clarified this situation stating that they have neither any holdings nor an account and the necessary contracts were not signed either. To this, pt4o replied with “what contract? Elaborate. A contract for a bank is a two party contract”. Note the tone of the conversation and this message. After a back and forth on the contract not existing because both parties did not sign it, the defendant stated "The contract is not there because you shredded it and destroyed evidence". This statement is where the plaintiff cites the 1st charge of defamation under article 16 of the civil code.

In a reply to the independent ombudsman mbh292, who sent the message "you literally said that you got charged 80% interest". Pt4o did not dispute this statement and mbh292 has agreed to testify as a witness if the need arises. Pt4o replied with "It was a sting operation to get olive to admit to charging exorbitant interest rates". This is where the plaintiff has cited the 2nd charge of defamation, specifically the claim of being charged an interest of 80%.

A few hours later, pt4o advertised his own bank, showing malicious intent.

Opening Statement (Defendant)

Your Honor, My client never intended to harm nor commit defamation on the "Peoples Bank". They plantiff argues that a relevant piece of information is that my client told the owner of "Peoples Bank" to close all illegal accounts operated in my client's name. This is not illegal, nor defamation, my client was simply trying to instruct the owner of "Peoples Bank" to close any accounts in my clients name, where the accounts would be illegal, as my client had never banked with the company known as "Peoples Bank". The plantiff argues that "The contract is not there because you shredded it and destroyed evidence" is defamation. However, this is just a joke made by my client. This was in no attempt trying to defamate the business. My client did not intend to cause damage to the plantiff with any sacrastic message relating to 80% interest rates in the Peoples Bank. Furthermore, the statement "It was a sting operation to get olive to admit to charging exorbitant interest rates" was a sarcastic comment. Lastly, my client did not advertise their bank maliciously.