Lawsuit: In Session ItsStormcraft v. Crown of Alexandria, Case X (2026)

[TheStormcrafter]

IN THE HONORABLE CHANCELLERY OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION
CASE NO. X
ENTREATY TO DISMISS - No progress clause pursuant to A.P.01.007 § 8(1)

Your Honors,

The Crown seeks dismissal of the entire case as the Plaintiff has failed to meet their obligation to take steps in furtherance of the case after 7 days. Section 8 of the Statute of Limitations Act clearly mandates that this case be dismissed. See id.

The last step Plaintiff had taken in any furtherance of this case was on October 6th when they responded to the Defence’s Entreaty to Strike and Objection. Furthermore, the Court on October 10th gave the Plaintiff 72 hours to submit their Opening Statement. The Plaintiff had 7 days to ask for a continuance or for more time, and they did not. See ItsStormcraft v. Crown, Case X (Ch. 2026).

While the Plaintiff has brought up that their Counsel was in-fact deported, they were not deported until October 15th (As Discovery has now closed, the Crown does not feel comfortable submitting evidence of this. However, if the Court wishes we can provide that information). This was 9 days after the last instance of furtherance taken in this case, and 2 days after the 72 hour deadline to submit their Opening Statement.

The Crown acknowledges that the Plaintiff did edit their complaint on October 12th, however the Crown does not believe this constitutes a furtherance of the case as this was simply complying with the Court’s previous order on October 3rd and the Court’s reminder on October 10th under duress of Contempt. This is merely a delayed compliance with a previous action, not an overt act of furtherance as is required under §8 of the Statute of Limitations Act.

Respectfully submitted,
bloodyrebals
Minister of Justice

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
Re: Entreaty to Dismiss

Your Honours,
I oppose this Entreaty to dismiss on two grounds:
First, if a Mistrial is granted, the Entreaty would be moot.
Second, Plaintiff Abandonment requires more than just inaction on the side of the plaintiff, it requires the plaintiff to not take action while having reason to do so. Otherwise the court simply deliberating for a week would mean a case is dismissed—this proposition is untenable. Further, just the option to take an action cannot be construed as sufficient for the time to be ticking—a party may oppose any filing for that matter and may entreat for reconsideration of every decision and motions can be filed without prompting as well—voluntarily abstaining from these options as one does not believe them required is not the same as abandonment and should not be treated as such. Otherwise, plaintiffs in the future will have to file frivolous motions or objections to reset the clock with cases in the past having gone on for over half a year at times (with long periods of what can only be described as "undeclared recess").
Plaintiff provides that demand to take action was only provided on the 12th of October, so no seven days where elapsed when Counsel was deported. As Plaintiff had no specific reason to act prior to the 12th, it cannot be construed for the case to have been abandoned. Dismissal is therefore unwarranted.

So petitioned before this honourable court,
Kaladin Stormblessed

 

[Smallfries]

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
Entreaty for Continuance

Your Honour,

it appears my Counsel was deported. I am currently out of Country until Monday and am unable to engage with this case past this posts, including looking for potential new Counsel.
I therefore ask for all (potential) deadline towards me to be tolled until Wednesday EOD, so I have sufficient time to search for Counsel or otherwise to evaluate the case at hand once I am home again.

So petitioned before this honourable Court,
Kaladin Stormblessed

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
Entreaty for Mistrial

Your Honour,
first: I have been unable to secure Counsel at this time and will proceed on my own for the time being.
Now to the main part. Looking over the actions of Counsel, while they did provide with a wonderful service while working on this case, it appears they departed from this server even before being deported. During the course of this proceeding, Counsel opened a Minecraft server of their own and guided it through server start. Two filings Counsel promised me in communications to submit where never filed.
Looking at it, with time now on my hands again, it appears that due to the failings of Counsel deadlines where missed, but I plead the court to not count this against my person but said counsel. I therefore entreat for a Mistrial to be diagnosed and a renewed option for opening statements (and potential other responses to motions) to be given.

So petitioned before this honourable court,
Kaladin Stormblessed

I am not familiar with this any writ of mistrial. While indeed our rules do specify that writs listed are not exhaustive, any unrecognized requests must come "with a thorough explanation." I do not particularly understand what is being asked for, or why it should be granted.

I understand it has something to do with opening statements. Your opening statement was due on the 13th, eight days ago. You requested an extension three days ago, a full five days after the opening statement was due. Public records show your former counsellor was deported two days before that, or three days after opening statements were due.

Now, today, you ask for something, the purpose of which I assume is to get more time to create the opening statement. Why did you not check up with the case periodically? Yes, your counsellor was entrusted to manage it, but you are not only an actual party that any judgment impacts, but also the claimant who brings suit in the first place. Assuming you only became aware of your counsel's deportation when you requested the extension—three days ago—you still have had three days fully knowing you had a pending opening statement due. Neither too did you seem to check any of the previous five days.

What is it, exactly, you want to do? Why do you not already have an opening statement ready? Why are you asking to me to give you more time to write one, instead of asking to post something you already have? I understand your lawyer was deported. But you are the party, and you are the filing party. Why did you not pay more attention to the action you initiated, and why should this not be dismissed for want of prosecution?

 

[bloodyrebals]

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
Re: Entreaty to Dismiss

Your Honours,
I oppose this Entreaty to dismiss on two grounds:
First, if a Mistrial is granted, the Entreaty would be moot.
Second, Plaintiff Abandonment requires more than just inaction on the side of the plaintiff, it requires the plaintiff to not take action while having reason to do so. Otherwise the court simply deliberating for a week would mean a case is dismissed—this proposition is untenable. Further, just the option to take an action cannot be construed as sufficient for the time to be ticking—a party may oppose any filing for that matter and may entreat for reconsideration of every decision and motions can be filed without prompting as well—voluntarily abstaining from these options as one does not believe them required is not the same as abandonment and should not be treated as such. Otherwise, plaintiffs in the future will have to file frivolous motions or objections to reset the clock with cases in the past having gone on for over half a year at times (with long periods of what can only be described as "undeclared recess").
Plaintiff provides that demand to take action was only provided on the 12th of October, so no seven days where elapsed when Counsel was deported. As Plaintiff had no specific reason to act prior to the 12th, it cannot be construed for the case to have been abandoned. Dismissal is therefore unwarranted.

So petitioned before this honourable court,
Kaladin Stormblessed

IN THE HONORABLE CHANCELLERY OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION
CASE NO. X
Objection - Procedural Breach

Your Honor, The plaintiff’s response to the Crown’s Entreaty to Dismiss was filed approximately 12 hours after the 48 hour deadline.

 

[bloodyrebals]

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
Re: Entreaty to Dismiss

Your Honours,
I oppose this Entreaty to dismiss on two grounds:
First, if a Mistrial is granted, the Entreaty would be moot.
Second, Plaintiff Abandonment requires more than just inaction on the side of the plaintiff, it requires the plaintiff to not take action while having reason to do so. Otherwise the court simply deliberating for a week would mean a case is dismissed—this proposition is untenable. Further, just the option to take an action cannot be construed as sufficient for the time to be ticking—a party may oppose any filing for that matter and may entreat for reconsideration of every decision and motions can be filed without prompting as well—voluntarily abstaining from these options as one does not believe them required is not the same as abandonment and should not be treated as such. Otherwise, plaintiffs in the future will have to file frivolous motions or objections to reset the clock with cases in the past having gone on for over half a year at times (with long periods of what can only be described as "undeclared recess").
Plaintiff provides that demand to take action was only provided on the 12th of October, so no seven days where elapsed when Counsel was deported. As Plaintiff had no specific reason to act prior to the 12th, it cannot be construed for the case to have been abandoned. Dismissal is therefore unwarranted.

So petitioned before this honourable court,
Kaladin Stormblessed

IN THE HONORABLE CHANCELLERY OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION
CASE NO. X
Objection - Procedural Breach

Your Honor, The plaintiff’s response to the Crown’s Entreaty to Dismiss was filed approximately 12 hours after the 48 hour deadline.

 

[TheStormcrafter]

I am not familiar with this any writ of mistrial. While indeed our rules do specify that writs listed are not exhaustive, any unrecognized requests must come "with a thorough explanation." I do not particularly understand what is being asked for, or why it should be granted.

I understand it has something to do with opening statements. Your opening statement was due on the 13th, eight days ago. You requested an extension three days ago, a full five days after the opening statement was due. Public records show your former counsellor was deported two days before that, or three days after opening statements were due.

Now, today, you ask for something, the purpose of which I assume is to get more time to create the opening statement. Why did you not check up with the case periodically? Yes, your counsellor was entrusted to manage it, but you are not only an actual party that any judgment impacts, but also the claimant who brings suit in the first place. Assuming you only became aware of your counsel's deportation when you requested the extension—three days ago—you still have had three days fully knowing you had a pending opening statement due. Neither too did you seem to check any of the previous five days.

What is it, exactly, you want to do? Why do you not already have an opening statement ready? Why are you asking to me to give you more time to write one, instead of asking to post something you already have? I understand your lawyer was deported. But you are the party, and you are the filing party. Why did you not pay more attention to the action you initiated, and why should this not be dismissed for want of prosecution?

Your Honour,
while I intended to write the brief today I came home from university not feeling well and took a break for the rest of the day. I therefore ask for your understanding and hope to attain a 24h continuance.

 

[TheStormcrafter]

I am not familiar with this any writ of mistrial. While indeed our rules do specify that writs listed are not exhaustive, any unrecognized requests must come "with a thorough explanation." I do not particularly understand what is being asked for, or why it should be granted.

I understand it has something to do with opening statements. Your opening statement was due on the 13th, eight days ago. You requested an extension three days ago, a full five days after the opening statement was due. Public records show your former counsellor was deported two days before that, or three days after opening statements were due.

Now, today, you ask for something, the purpose of which I assume is to get more time to create the opening statement. Why did you not check up with the case periodically? Yes, your counsellor was entrusted to manage it, but you are not only an actual party that any judgment impacts, but also the claimant who brings suit in the first place. Assuming you only became aware of your counsel's deportation when you requested the extension—three days ago—you still have had three days fully knowing you had a pending opening statement due. Neither too did you seem to check any of the previous five days.

What is it, exactly, you want to do? Why do you not already have an opening statement ready? Why are you asking to me to give you more time to write one, instead of asking to post something you already have? I understand your lawyer was deported. But you are the party, and you are the filing party. Why did you not pay more attention to the action you initiated, and why should this not be dismissed for want of prosecution?

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
Brief

Your Honour,
first I apologise for the further delays, I did not manage to write this brief yesterday due to time constraints. Sometimes a lot just happens in a day and as I planned on writing this in Friday (where I sadly wasn't feeling well and didn't think risking my physical wellbeing for a Minecraft Server worth it), it is not like I didn't schedule sufficient time, that schedule was just rendered useless. I therefore ask for a post-hoc further 24h continuance due to personal matters.
I became aware of my Counsel being deported shortly after Friday, the 16th of October began. At that time, I was already not home but on my way to a family vacation. With only a phone and no sleep (as well as a busy, family mandated schedule), I was not able to take any action at that time. I was aware of the case of course, but I was not able to allot time to it. When I handed in my initial filing asking for continuance, that was done when I had a moment of peace. While yes, the court neither granted or denied the motion at this time, simple practicality is that I was unable to put in any work on the case anyways so I had to hope the court would grant this and file my briefs properly once home again.
Once I returned and had time, I sat down and wrote out the Response to the Motion to Dismiss as well as the Entreaty for Mistrial. The Entreaty for Mistrial is supposed to refute that my counsel was effective and that through no fault of my own but solely a fault of counsel, a significant deadline was missed and this case is now threatened by dismissal for want of prosecution.
The image that Counsel projected towards plaintiff was that they were preparing filings and that things were generally handled. Looking at Counsel's actions now, it appears that Counsel was very much distracted as they opened a Minecraft Server during the time they worked on this case. I myself did not actively work on the case and only reviewed it and filings counsel wished to present to the court from time to time as I had a pretty busy week while settling into university.
With the Entreaty for Mistrial, I am now asking for a second chance so to say, to ensure a fair trial as it appears I did not have competent counsel in the end. I am asking for this and not just posting an opening statement because I believe that train to have departed, so to say, as the deadline is long gone. Unless prompted by the court anew (which I am seeking with the Mistrial), I did not believe filing an Opening Statement right now to be in-order.
As for why this case should not be dismissed, I would like to refer to my Response to the Motion to Dismiss as well as the Motion for Continuance. I very much did not abandon this case and am acting as soon as feasible.
I hope this is able to satisfy the court, I am just one person now trying my best. Mistakes here and there are sadly inevitable and I am deeply sorry for the delays and the confusion caused. I am however present now and taking responsibility for this case.

So submitted before this honourable court,
Kaladin Stormblessed

 

[TheStormcrafter]

IN THE HONORABLE CHANCELLERY OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION
CASE NO. X
Objection - Procedural Breach

Your Honor, The plaintiff’s response to the Crown’s Entreaty to Dismiss was filed approximately 12 hours after the 48 hour deadline.

IN THE CHANCERY OF ALEXANDRIA
Re: Objection

Your Honour,
under the assumption that continuance was granted per my Entreaty for Continuance—asking for continuance for all outstanding or potential deadlines—, this response was filed on-time. Due to practical limitations, I had to act under this assumption that the Writ was granted, as issuing filings prior was not possible anyways.

So petitioned before this honourable court,
Kaladin Stormblessed