Lawsuit: Adjourned PhillinDeBlanc & L0U_4L v. Hello1341, Case 12 (2026)

[PhillinDeBlanc]

IN THE HONOURABLE MAGISTRATE OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
CIVIL ACTION
Case No. 12

BETWEEN:

PhillinDeBlanc & L0U_4L
(Plaintiffs)

V.

Hello1341
(Respondent)

I. Jurisdictional Statement
This Court has jurisdiction over this suit through Alex. Const. Part III §16 which states that the Magistrate court shall have jurisdiction over civil matters.

II. Parties

1. The Plaintiffs are PhillinDeBlanc and L0U_4L, both of which were brutally mauled by wolves belonging to the defendant.
2. The Respondent is Hello1341, the owner of the wolf/wolves that bit PhillinDeBlanc and L0U_4L

III. Facts

1. The Constitution states that: "every player has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof" (Alex. Const. Part V. §22.11)
2. On July 30st 12:30 AM, one of the Plaintiffs, L0U_4L, was taking Hello1341's wolves for a walk.
3. All of a sudden a wolf belonging to the respondent bit the Plaintiff, L0U_4L.
4. L0U_4L was able to get away.
5. L0U_4L feared for their life.
6. On August 1st, 12:46 AM EST, the Respondent and both of the Plaintiffs were at C-3-Regent-st.
7. Shortly thereafter, one of the Plaintiffs, PhillinDeBlanc was brutally mauled by the Respondent's pack of wolves.
8. The Respondent refused to compensate the Plaintiffs for the harm their wolves had done to them, offering only £0.88.
9. The wolves that harmed the Plaintiffs were under the ownership of the Respondent.
10. By allowing their wolves to harm the Plaintiffs, the Respondent deprived them of their Constitutional Right to life, liberty and security of their persons.

IV. Claims for Relief

1. The Respondent, through being unable to control his wolves, caused the Plaintiffs grave harm. His wolves brutally mauled the Plaintiffs, thus depriving them of life, liberty, and security of their persons.​

V. Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs respectfully requests that this honourable court:

A. Award the Plaintiffs £3,000 each for their pain and suffering. (£6,000 total).
B. Mandate that the Respondent relinquish ownership of his wolves to a shelter until he can better control them.
C. Award the Plaintiffs any other costs that this court deem necessary.


Respectfully submitted to the Magistrates Court,
PhillinDeBlanc, on behalf of the Plaintiffs.

Dated: August 1st, 2026

 

[SoggehToast]

Retitled in accordance with current citation standards.

 

[SoggehToast]

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@hello1341 is hereby commanded to appear before the Magistrates Court of the Kingdom of Alexandria in

Case 12 (Mag Ct., 2026)

PhillinDeBlanc & L0U_4L
Claimants/Plaintiffs

v.

hello1341
Respondent/Defendent

They are hereby required to do so within seventy-two (72) hours. Failure to do so may result in default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

So ordered,
Magistrate Soggeh T. Oast​

 

[hello1341]

Your honor, I am present.

IN THE MAGISTRATES COURT OF THE KINGDOM OF ALEXANDRIA
WRIT OF SUMMONS

@hello1341 is hereby commanded to appear before the Magistrates Court of the Kingdom of Alexandria in

Case 12 (Mag Ct., 2026)

PhillinDeBlanc & L0U_4L
Claimants/Plaintiffs

v.

hello1341
Respondent/Defendent

They are hereby required to do so within seventy-two (72) hours. Failure to do so may result in default judgement based on the known facts of the case.

So ordered,
Magistrate Soggeh T. Oast​

 

[SoggehToast]

Your honor, I am present.

Awesome. You have 72 hours to submit your Answer.

 

[Nim]

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

Your Honour,

I, Nimq_, appear for Hello1341 and swear to the Crown to speak the truth and nothing but the truth.

Response to the allegations

1. The parties' identities and ownership of the wolves are admitted. The Defendant admits being present with the Plaintiffs among the wolves and that both Plaintiffs were bitten.
2. The Defendant denies that L0U_4L was walking his wolves. He cannot remember whether there were two separate incidents. The precise dates, times and alleged C-3-Regent-st location are therefore not admitted on current instructions. This does not deny that a second incident occurred.
3. The Defendant recalls PhillinDeBlanc punching either him or a wolf before the wolves pursued PhillinDeBlanc; he cannot specify which was struck. He makes no such allegation against L0U_4L.
4. The description of grave harm is disputed. L0U_4L's escape and alleged fear are not admitted on current instructions and require evidence.
5. The £0.88 offer is admitted: that was the amount the Defendant had. It was not a valuation of the injuries. The Defendant denies owing the compensation claimed.
6. The constitutional quotation is accepted, but the alleged constitutional violation and negligence are denied. Constitutional questions are reserved to the Chancery under the Constitution, Part III, Articles 15–16

Defence and relief

Each Plaintiff must establish duty, breach, causation and damage. See Nimq_ v. Crown, Case 2 (Mag. Ct., 2025), post #32. PhillinDeBlanc's alleged preceding punch is relevant to breach and causation; the two Plaintiffs' claims require separate assessment.

The £3,000 claimed per Plaintiff requires supporting evidence. In Nimq_, final verdict, post #46, the Court awarded £5 where only two lost hearts were established and additional harm or higher recovery costs were not substantiated. That is persuasive guidance on proof and valuation, not a fixed cap.

The Defendant also contests surrender of the wolves and unspecified costs without an established legal and evidential basis.

The Defendant requests judgment in his favour or, if liability is proven, relief limited to what each Plaintiff substantiates. Remaining factual particulars will be addressed through discovery and the Court's directions.

Respectfully,
Nimq_
Counsel for Hello1341

 

[SoggehToast]

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

Your Honour,

I, Nimq_, appear for Hello1341 and swear to the Crown to speak the truth and nothing but the truth.

Response to the allegations

1. The parties' identities and ownership of the wolves are admitted. The Defendant admits being present with the Plaintiffs among the wolves and that both Plaintiffs were bitten.
2. The Defendant denies that L0U_4L was walking his wolves. He cannot remember whether there were two separate incidents. The precise dates, times and alleged C-3-Regent-st location are therefore not admitted on current instructions. This does not deny that a second incident occurred.
3. The Defendant recalls PhillinDeBlanc punching either him or a wolf before the wolves pursued PhillinDeBlanc; he cannot specify which was struck. He makes no such allegation against L0U_4L.
4. The description of grave harm is disputed. L0U_4L's escape and alleged fear are not admitted on current instructions and require evidence.
5. The £0.88 offer is admitted: that was the amount the Defendant had. It was not a valuation of the injuries. The Defendant denies owing the compensation claimed.
6. The constitutional quotation is accepted, but the alleged constitutional violation and negligence are denied. Constitutional questions are reserved to the Chancery under the Constitution, Part III, Articles 15–16

Defence and relief

Each Plaintiff must establish duty, breach, causation and damage. See Nimq_ v. Crown, Case 2 (Mag. Ct., 2025), post #32. PhillinDeBlanc's alleged preceding punch is relevant to breach and causation; the two Plaintiffs' claims require separate assessment.

The £3,000 claimed per Plaintiff requires supporting evidence. In Nimq_, final verdict, post #46, the Court awarded £5 where only two lost hearts were established and additional harm or higher recovery costs were not substantiated. That is persuasive guidance on proof and valuation, not a fixed cap.

The Defendant also contests surrender of the wolves and unspecified costs without an established legal and evidential basis.

The Defendant requests judgment in his favour or, if liability is proven, relief limited to what each Plaintiff substantiates. Remaining factual particulars will be addressed through discovery and the Court's directions.

Respectfully,
Nimq_
Counsel for Hello1341

Can you provide evidence of your authorization to litigate this matter on the Defendants behalf?

 

[PhillinDeBlanc]

Can you provide evidence of your authorization to litigate this matter on the Defendants behalf?

Your Honour,

It is a matter of fact that Nim was not summoned to testify nor invited to appear by this Honourable Court. If he is here to represent the defendant we have yet to see proof.

We can't have strangers to the courtroom barging in and speaking out of turn without being called to testify or appear, this level of disrespect to decorum greatly degrades public trust, and faith in the great Courts of the Kingdom of Alexandria.

It is of the Plaintiff's opinion that we should not bear this blatant disrespect,. The Plaintiff herefore respectfully asks the Honourable Magistrate to take this affront to the Court's authority with the utmost seriousness and hold Nim in Contempt of Court.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Plaintiffs,
PhilAnthropy

 

[Nim]

Can you provide evidence of your authorization to litigate this matter on the Defendants behalf?

 

[Nim]

Your Honour,

I respectfully oppose the request for contempt. My Answer identified me as counsel and included the required oath. I have responded to the Court’s request concerning authorization in post #9.

Under Criminal Code §11(3), contempt requires disrespect toward a judicial officer or wilful disobedience of a lawful order. The Plaintiff has not established either.

I ask that the contempt request be refused and that both parties be directed to avoid personal characterisations and keep submissions focused on the issues.

 

[SoggehToast]

@Nim

This screenshot provided (#9) suspiciously does not include the username of the sender and appears to have been taken from a server chat, meaning it could have been sent by anyone. All I ask is that you provide a screenshot of a message that verifiably confirms your authorization.

 

[hello1341]

@Nim

This screenshot provided (#9) suspiciously does not include the username of the sender and appears to have been taken from a server chat, meaning it could have been sent by anyone. All I ask is that you provide a screenshot of a message that verifiably confirms your authorization.

Your honor, Nimq_ does have the authority to represent me in this court case.

 

[SoggehToast]

Your Honour,

It is a matter of fact that Nim was not summoned to testify nor invited to appear by this Honourable Court. If he is here to represent the defendant we have yet to see proof.

We can't have strangers to the courtroom barging in and speaking out of turn without being called to testify or appear, this level of disrespect to decorum greatly degrades public trust, and faith in the great Courts of the Kingdom of Alexandria.

It is of the Plaintiff's opinion that we should not bear this blatant disrespect,. The Plaintiff herefore respectfully asks the Honourable Magistrate to take this affront to the Court's authority with the utmost seriousness and hold Nim in Contempt of Court.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the Plaintiffs,
PhilAnthropy

Seeing that Nim is clearly serving as counsel for hello1341, and not a random stranger barging into this courtroom, he will not be held in Contempt.

 

[SoggehToast]

We shall now begin Discovery, which shall last for 72 hours but may be shortened upon request from both parties.

 

[Nim]

ENTREATY OF COMPELLING DISCOVERY AND NOTICE OF WITNESSES

Your Honour,

Under Court Rules III(6), the Defendant requests these existing materials within the Plaintiffs’ possession or control:

1. Recordings, screenshots and messages showing each alleged incident and the events immediately before and after it.
2. Records supporting each Plaintiff’s injuries, recovery costs, pain and suffering, and the £3,000 sought.
3. The complete conversation concerning the £0.88 offer.

These concern the disputed sequence of events, causation and damages. Privileged advice is excluded. Please identify any requested material that does not exist or is unavailable. We request a production deadline allowing review before discovery closes.

Under Rule III(7), the Defendant lists Hello1341, PhillinDeBlanc and L0U_4L as witnesses concerning the incidents, preceding contact and resulting harm.

Respectfully,
Nimq_
Counsel for Hello1341

 

[SoggehToast]

ENTREATY OF COMPELLING DISCOVERY AND NOTICE OF WITNESSES

Your Honour,

Under Court Rules III(6), the Defendant requests these existing materials within the Plaintiffs’ possession or control:

1. Recordings, screenshots and messages showing each alleged incident and the events immediately before and after it.
2. Records supporting each Plaintiff’s injuries, recovery costs, pain and suffering, and the £3,000 sought.
3. The complete conversation concerning the £0.88 offer.

These concern the disputed sequence of events, causation and damages. Privileged advice is excluded. Please identify any requested material that does not exist or is unavailable. We request a production deadline allowing review before discovery closes.

Under Rule III(7), the Defendant lists Hello1341, PhillinDeBlanc and L0U_4L as witnesses concerning the incidents, preceding contact and resulting harm.

Respectfully,
Nimq_
Counsel for Hello1341

@PhillinDeBlanc Within the next 24 hours, please disclose to the Court your willingness or lack thereof to produce these requested materials.

Additionally, I believe granting this Entreaty to Compel in its current state would leave some uncertainty as to what "each alleged incident" refers to exactly. Please identify which incidents you are referring to in particular. @Nim

 

[Nim]

Your Honour,

“Each alleged incident” refers to the two events pleaded in the Complaint:

1. The alleged bite to L0U_4L on 30 July 2026 at 12:30 AM, described in Section III, paragraphs 2–5.
2. The alleged attack on PhillinDeBlanc at C-3-Regent-st on 1 August 2026 at 12:46 AM EST, described in Section III, paragraphs 6–7.

The request covers existing material showing those events and their immediate lead-up and aftermath. The £0.88 conversation is the offer alleged in Section III, paragraph 8.

These particulars identify the Plaintiffs’ allegations for discovery purposes and do not amend the Defendant’s admissions or denials.

Respectfully,
Nimq_

 

[PhillinDeBlanc]

@PhillinDeBlanc Within the next 24 hours, please disclose to the Court your willingness or lack thereof to produce these requested materials.

Additionally, I believe granting this Entreaty to Compel in its current state would leave some uncertainty as to what "each alleged incident" refers to exactly. Please identify which incidents you are referring to in particular. @Nim

Your Honour,

The Plaintiffs are happy and willing to produce these materials.

Respectfully,
Phil Anthropy

 

[SoggehToast]

ENTREATY OF COMPELLING DISCOVERY AND NOTICE OF WITNESSES

Your Honour,

Under Court Rules III(6), the Defendant requests these existing materials within the Plaintiffs’ possession or control:

1. Recordings, screenshots and messages showing each alleged incident and the events immediately before and after it.
2. Records supporting each Plaintiff’s injuries, recovery costs, pain and suffering, and the £3,000 sought.
3. The complete conversation concerning the £0.88 offer.

These concern the disputed sequence of events, causation and damages. Privileged advice is excluded. Please identify any requested material that does not exist or is unavailable. We request a production deadline allowing review before discovery closes.

Under Rule III(7), the Defendant lists Hello1341, PhillinDeBlanc and L0U_4L as witnesses concerning the incidents, preceding contact and resulting harm.

Respectfully,
Nimq_
Counsel for Hello1341

Granted. @PhillinDeBlanc is ordered to produce the following within the next 24 hours:

1. Any records, screenshots, and messages showing the events described in (#17).
2. Any records substantiating the claimed injuries and pain and suffering, and the requested £3,000 in damages for each Plaintiff.
3. The complete conversation concerning the Defendant's offer of £0.88, as mentioned in the Complaint (#1).

 

[PhillinDeBlanc]

Granted. @PhillinDeBlanc is ordered to produce the following within the next 24 hours:

1. Any records, screenshots, and messages showing the events described in (#17).
2. Any records substantiating the claimed injuries and pain and suffering, and the requested £3,000 in damages for each Plaintiff.
3. The complete conversation concerning the Defendant's offer of £0.88, as mentioned in the Complaint (#1).

Your Honour,

The Plaintiffs would like to ask for a 48 hour extension to this deadline. As you well know, these events happened over a month ago and it will take time for the Plaintiffs to get the evidence in order.

Respectfully,
The Plaintiffs.