Tungsten

SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS COUNTY OF LOS SANTOS, PROBATE DIVISION Case No. LCS-2025-P-0310 In the Matter of Thomas McLoughlin, Ex Parte _____________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL PROTECTIVE ORDER A preponderance of the evidence having been presented by Thomas McLoughlin before me, I hereby find that the following person [ ] has engaged in ongoing harassment [X] is a danger to the petitioner. PERSON TO BE RESTRAINED: ARDI HOXHA Sex: [X] M [ ] F Height: 5' 11" Weight: 187 lbs. Hair Color: Brown Eye Color: Green Race: Caucasian Age: __________ Date of Birth: __/__/____ This person is to: [X] have no contact with the petitioner including phone, email, social media, and second-hand contact through shared friends, family, and associates; [X] refrain from knowingly being present and remaining within 500 feet of the petitioner, the petitioner's home, or the petitioner's known place of work. Judicial Notes: The petitioner's "known place of work" shall be construed to include his police patrol vehicle. Violation of this order shall be punishable under Penal Code § 115, Stalking, and Penal Code § 622, Contempt of Court. This proceeding was heard on March 19th, 2025 at 22:00 at the Superior Court of San Andreas, County of Los Santos, Courtroom 1 before Judge Florence Weathers-Peterson. The subject of this order may appeal the order of this court within 30 days of issuance. This order shall take effect upon service of the order upon the subject of the order by a peace officer or other process server permitted by law. Signed, FLORENCE WEATHERS-PETERSON Judge, Criminal Division County of Los Santos Superior Court of San Andreas

I like handling the meat in the Star Street Butcher Shop. 😜

** The case is closed administratively by the Clerk for Department 440.

** The docket is closed and the order is finalized.

** The court resumes proceedings before Judge Harold Weingarten, whose clerk calls the case. "Uhh-- alright, Wright versus Hockenbeyer. The clerk will record that 23 hours have passed since our last proceeding. Mr. Wright has performed the necessary service of process and the clerk has attempted to make contact with the former judge Mr. Hockenbeyer. I am now prepared to proceed with a default judgment." "First, we will examine the facts as presented by Mr. Wright. Since these facts have not been duly challenged by Mr. Hockenbeyer in the form of a reply brief, they will be afforded additional deference." "In examining whether the Plaintiff has a cause of action for suit, we look Mireles as cited in the authorities. It is clear that Mr. Hockenbeyer, when acting in his judicial capacity, is immune from both suit and money damages. As the court said, 'it is a general principle of the highest importance to the proper administration of justice that a judicial officer, in exercising the authority vested in him, shall be free to act upon his own convictions, without apprehension of personal consequences to himself'. Therefore, we must examine next whether Mr. Hockenbeyer's actions exceeded his judicial authority and stepped into a non-judicial capacity. This court is bound by Mireles." "Moving into an analysis of whether Mr. Hockenbeyer's actions exceeded his judicial authority, thereby becoming non-judicial, this court must examine two elements. First, this court considers whether Mr. Hockenbeyer's actions were 'de facto' unreasonable or in violation of his mandate. Second, this court must examine whether the actions of Mr. Hockenbeyer transferred from 'judicial' authority to 'executive' authority in a test outlined by Mireles. This court has examined the remainder of the authorities cited and finds no cause for consideration of any except Mireles and Murchison." "In considering whether Mr. Hockenbeyer's actions were 'de facto' unreasonable, this court finds that the former judge's inattentiveness to the case at hand were in fact unreasonable. Mr. Hockenbeyer, while he was a judge, was required by the applicable professional standards set out in the Canons of Judicial Conduct. However, Mr. Hockenbeyer is immune from both suit and assessment of money damages under the framework set out in Mireles unless it can be demonstrated that his conduct departed from judicial authority and became either executive or personal. If the judge's conduct is executive in nature, this court must lessen Mr. Hockenbeyer's immunity to that of qualified immunity. If the judge's conduct is personal in nature, he receives no immunity. Therefore, this court must examine whether Mr. Hockenbeyer's actions as a judge were personal or executive in nature. Applying Murchison, this court finds that trial and conviction 'sua sponte' during the proceedings of Jefferson versus City of Los Santos, et alia, violated the due process clause of the fifth amendment as incorporated by the fourteenth amendment equal protection clause. This court is bound by Miranda v. Johnson, as incorporated, to enforce the fifth amendment guarantees afforded by the equal protection clause. Therefore, Mr. Hockenbeyer's actions in fact exceeded his judicial authority. This court finds that the actions taken by Mr. Hockenbeyer were mixed in nature – acting as both prosecutor, judge, and executioner – and therefore we must treat his actions as having been performed with executive authority. Therefore, under Mireles, Mr. Hockenbeyer is entitled to qualified immunity only. In order to determine whether Mr. Hockenbeyer receives immunity, this court must then examine whether Mr. Hockenbeyer's actions were 'de facto' unreasonable and whether existing case law placed Mr. Hockenbeyer on notice that such actions were unlawful. This court returns to Murchison in this examination and finds that Mr. Hockenbeyer is not entitled to qualified immunity. He is therefore liable for personal damages in this particular instance. However, this court also finds that the intrusion of the 'sua sponte' contempt proceeding was a 'de minimis' digression on the case at hand and had essentially no effect other than minor delays. Minor delays in trial proceedings do not warrant money damages, therefore this court does not award the special damages requested by Mr. Wright." "Plaintiff Mr. Wright has also made an assertion that he is therefore entitled to recover damages in the amount that he would have recovered upon successful suit. However, Plaintiff has not shown sufficiently that his representation of Ms. Michelle Jefferson would have resulted in a victory for his client in Jefferson versus City of Los Santos, et alia. However, Mr. Wright achieved a win for his client Mr. Stefan Castillo in Castillo versus Los Santos Sheriff's Department. Therefore, this court finds that Plaintiff is not entitled to recover money damages from Mr. Hockenbeyer in either case, however will affirm the right to recover money damages from Mr. Castillo. In doing so, Mr. Wright's compensation will be entirely dependent on the terms of his representation agreement with Mr. Castillo. Since this is not the suit at hand, this court will not award any damages here. Plaintiff is encouraged to make a reasonable attempt to collect payment from Mr. Castillo and to bring suit against him if collection is unsuccessful. This court also affirms the right to recover money damages from Ms. Jefferson at the contracted rate as permitted in the terms therein." "Therefore the final order of default judgment issued by this court is as follows." "Firstly, Mr. Wright is entitled to recover regular attorney fees from both Mr. Castillo and Ms. Jefferson according to the terms of his contract with each of them. If collection is unsuccessful, he may bring suit against them in order to collect such fees and this court will enforce that agreement as written and assented to. Secondly, Mr. Wright is not entitled to recovery of money damages in any amount from Mr. Hockenbeyer. Thirdly, Mr. Hockenbeyer will be forwarded to both the Judicial Commission and to the State Bar of San Andreas for both sanction proceedings and consideration of disbarment for his actions. This court is not able to rule on that issue and therefore forwards the matter to the proper authorities." "If you believe I have erred in this decision, speak now or forever hold your peace – or, of course feel free to file a notice of appeal with this court within thirty days and I will grant leave. Are there any questions, comments, or concerns, counselors?" ** Judge Weingarten waits for any replies. (( @Kotwica @almightybounter )) (( Closing in 24 hours from now if no replies received. ))

“Understood, Mr. Wright, we’ll adjourn for now and my clerk will make one last attempt to establish contact with Mr. Hockenbeyer before I enter a default judgment. We’ll resume proceedings tomorrow— if there’s no word by then, I’ll honor your request.” ** Judge Weingarten bangs the gavel and adjourns the court. ** The clerk attempts later to make contact. (( @almightybounter @Kotwica )) (( 24 hours from right now is 18:20 Eastern on 1/16/25 ))

** The case is transferred to the court of Judge Harold Weingarten, Civil Division, 1st Judicial District. ** The case is called and proceedings resume. "Are the parties prepared to proceed?" (( Activity warning: This case will be closed out OOC on January 22nd if no responses are received. )) (( @Raven @ImperiumXVII ))

** The case is called and proceedings begin before Judge Harold Weingarten, Civil Division, 1st Judicial District. "Are the parties prepared to proceed? I assume service of process has been distributed?" (( Activity warning: This case will be closed out OOC on January 22nd if no responses are received. )) (( @Kotwica @almightybounter ))

(( This case is closed for player inactivity reasons. Award is vacated and the losing party will no longer be required to pay it. See screenshot for proof of inactivity. ))

Superior Court of San Andreas County of Los Santos Civil Division Case Name: Donald J. Wright v. Judge Martin Hockenbeyer, in his personal and official capacity. Case Number: 24-CV-1035 This court, through the process of maintaining its docket, has seen fit to accelerate the hearing of this case to December 29th, 2024, at which time pre-trial motions will proceed. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 22nd, 2024 /s/ Peter K. Nichols, Jr. Judge, Civil Division, 2nd District Superior Court of San Andreas (( @Kotwica @almightybounter ))

(( This case is being closed because there are no longer any judges who can review it without an apparent OOC conflict of interest. ))

(( @ScubaStef please respond within 7 days if you are still active on the server, else this case will be closed for player inactivity reasons per myself and Izumi. ))

Superior Court of San Andreas County of Los Santos Civil Division Case Name: Donald J. Wright v. Judge Martin Hockenbeyer, in his personal and official capacity. Case Number: 24-CV-1035 This court issues the following orders: 1. Assignment of Docket Number The case is provisionally assigned the docket number 24-CV-1035, pending implementation of the Unified Docket System. When a new docket number is available, this court will notify all parties. 2. Order to Serve Parties Donald J. Wright, acting pro se or through counsel to be appointed, is ordered to serve Martin Hockenbeyer, the Defendant, with process notifying him of this proceeding. The Defendant is to be notified in-person, by mail, by email, or by another suitable form of service that gives reasonable notice to the defendant within 10 days prior to the scheduled date for the beginning of proceedings. (( Send as a PM to all parties and include the assigned Judge. )) 3. Scheduling of Proceedings This case is scheduled to proceed to pre-trial motions on January 14th, 2025. The judge to oversee this case will be assigned at a later time when resources permit. This date is subject to change with at least 14 days of notice to all parties. The parties are further ordered to preserve and take reasonable steps to prevent the destruction of all relevant evidence. Witnesses are ordered to remain in the state beginning 10 days before the beginning of proceedings through the final disposition of this matter. The parties are additionally ordered to begin the process of disclosure issuing subpoenas pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45, and the clerk shall issue any necessary subpoenas to facilitate this process. Copies of all subpoenas shall be filed with this court. SO ORDERED. Dated: November 3rd, 2024 /s/ Peter K. Nichols, Jr. Judge, Civil Division, 2nd District Superior Court of San Andreas (( @Kotwica @almightybounter ))

Donald J. Wright Plaintiff, vs. Judge Martin Hockenbeyer, in his personal and official capacity Defendants. Case No.: Unassigned TEMPORARY ORDER SUSPENDING PROCEEDINGS Upon initial review of this filing, this court finds that the filing is proper and initial cause of action is found to proceed. However, under the standing order of the Supreme Court of San Andreas, all civil proceedings that have not yet been assigned to a judge are suspended and cannot proceed indefinitely until a Presiding Judge of the Civil Division is appointed. As such, this case is unable to be accepted or assigned and will remain in a status of suspended until the administrative suspension is lifted by the Chief Justice. SO ORDERED. Hon. Peter K. Nichols, Jr. Judge, 2nd District, Superior Court of San Andreas

Donald Wright saved my life.

Best of luck running the courts. @kendrick is a lying dog-faced pony soldier and @Sparkles works at a Best Buy in central Texas and will never be anything more

cool

Best Buy? Lol

All of this, plus we need a roadmap that shows where we are and where we're going.

In all reality: If the server was more cooperative and horizontally-structured rather than the anemic hierarchy it is today, perhaps there would be a shred of hope for actually working together to rebuild what we used to have in this community. From my recent experience, there are many players in leadership roles who never did anything to deserve those roles and who consistently demonstrate their incompetency in those roles. Meanwhile, people like myself are discouraged from holding any player leadership role because of the constant drama generated by those same incompetent people. That same evaluation is true of a great many staff, many of whom I have great difficulty believing their promotion was based in merit rather than nepotism. The development team, the company team, and certain members of management are the only functioning thing about the staff team in my view - and that is worrying when the staff team is as big as it is. I have said many times - the name of the game is feature parity and cooperation.

maybe i'm just not seeing this "mass exodus" if they want to go back to panda land and pay $10 to own a dog, fuck 'em

i have a good time playing when i do log on have we considered the possibility that the people leaving were going to find a reason to leave and do it anyway?

Changes

Residence Address: Underpass

Cardio