Lawsuit: Pending Capt11543 v. YeetGlazer & DocTheory, Case 18 (Mag. Ct. 2025)

[Capt11543]

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION

Capt11543, Plaintiff

vs.

YeetGlazer, Defendant
DocTheory, Defendant

I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff Capt11543 files suit against Defendants YeetGlazer and DocTheory for their violent and disruptive conduct during a political rally on August 18, 2025 (the “Rally”), at which Plaintiff was an organizer and a speaker. Defendants were present at the Rally location not to peacefully support or oppose Plaintiff's political activity, but to commit mass murder, harass Plaintiff, and prevent Plaintiff's peaceful enjoyment of the event.

II. PARTIES

1. Capt11543 (in his capacity as a private citizen), a speaker and organizer at the Rally
2. YeetGlazer, an individual who committed several murders at the Rally
3. DocTheory, an individual who committed several murders at the Rally.

III. FACTS

1. On August 18, 2025, Plaintiff helped organize a rally to attract support for his political party at the August 2025 Parliamentary Election at c-3-pier-st (the “Location”).
2. The Rally was a peaceful political demonstration which was open to the public.
3. Defendant YeetGlazer was present at the Location from before the start of the Rally.
4. Defendant DocTheory arrived during the scheduled time for the Rally.
5. Defendant YeetGlazer engaged in near constant violence before and during the Rally, murdering Plaintiff several times.
6. Defendant DocTheory engaged in sporadic violence during the Rally, and murdered Plaintiff one or more times.
7. Plaintiff was not the only target of Defendants’ violence.
8. Rally organizers were forced to divert their attention away from engaging with attendees to manage Defendants’ conduct and suffered death and serious injury.
9. Rally attendees were placed in danger due to Defendants’ conduct and suffered death and serious injury.

IV. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

1. Plaintiff suffered death, injury, and loss of enjoyment as a result of Defendants’ conduct.
2. The Magistrate's Court holds original jurisdiction over all civil matters, and is thus the proper venue for this suit. See A.P.01-044.
3. The Magistrate's Court has the authority to hold individuals liable for criminal conduct in a civil context. Plaintiff must show on the balance of probabilities that Defendants were responsible for the damages suffered by Plaintiff. See Entreaty for Prior Ponderance I (Ch. 2025).

V. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
In seeking just relief, Plaintiff petitions the Court:

1. That the Defendants be ordered to pay £1000 each in punitive damages.

 

[Capt11543]

IN THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
ENTREATY TO DISMISS

Your Honor,

I filed this case with the full and unthinking confidence that the statute of limitations for civil action was two months. Unfortunately, this is not the case. See A.P.01-007:

5 - Limitations Placed on Civil Complaints
(1) A player may only file a civil complaint in the Magistrate or Chancery Court in their original jurisdiction in the event that the most recent conduct of the cause of action occurred within thirty days of the complaint being filed.

Fair and equal application of the law should be a fundamental principle of legal practice in Alexandria. Continuing a case with such a glaring legal defect would violate my ethics as a lawyer. Worse, it would besmirch the legal profession and undermine Alexandrians' confidence in the courts. As a citizen of this fair nation, I cannot in good conscience bear responsibility for such an outcome.

Accordingly, I petition this Court to dismiss this case.

Respectfully submitted,
Capt11543
Plaintiff