Case: Adjourned Lysander Lyon v. Hies Kennick (2026) CV 32

[xXLordLyonXx]

Lysander Lyon, Plaintiff
v.
Hies Kennick, Defendant


Civil Complaint:
On July 21st, the Defendant pickpocketed the Plaintiff at b008, stealing $90.03.


Parties:
Plaintiff - Lysander Lyon
Defendant - Hies Kennick


Factual Allegations:
(1) On July 21st, the Defendant pickpocketed the Plaintiff while he was at b008.
(2) The Plaintiff lost $90.03 to this pickpocketing.
(3) The Defendant was caught in the act and is clearly known.
(4) This is all documented in Exhibit P-001.


Legal Claims:
(1) The Plaintiff is entitled to restitution from the Defendant for this theft, which occurred in Exhibit P-001.


Prayer for Relief:
(1) Compensatory damages in the amount of $90.03, for the theft.
(2) Punitive damages in the amount of $500, to punish this negative and harmful behavior.
(3) Legal damages in the amount of $1,000 per week as allowed by the Damages Reform Act.


Verification:
I, Lysander Lyon, hereby affirm that the allegations in the complaint AND all subsequent statements made in court are true and correct to the best of the plaintiff's knowledge, information, and belief and that any falsehoods may bring the penalty of perjury.

Spoiler: P-001

 

[jotoho]

Writ of Summons

Azalea Isles District Court, Civil Case (CV)

Case No. CV-26-32
​

Plaintiff: Lysander Lyon
Defendant: Hies Kennick (Hies_Kennick)

​

The Defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of Lysander Lyon v. Hies Kennick (2026) CV 32. Failure to indicate your presence within 48 hours may result in a default judgement. Both parties are asked to familiarize themselves with the relevant court documents, including proper formats, as well as the laws referenced in the complaint. Ensure that you comply with any court orders.

Both parties are required to inform the Court whether they consent to hold this trial, in full or in part, at the Azalea Isles Courthouse in-person.
The Court will try to work with both parties to hold live hearings at convenient times.

​

Signed,
Hon. Judge Iturgen "jotoho" Bolir

 

[xXLordLyonXx]

Request For Default Judgement

Your Honor, as the Defendant has failed to show, I am requesting a default judgement be ordered.

 

[jotoho]

Request For Default Judgement

Your Honor, as the Defendant has failed to show, I am requesting a default judgement be ordered.

Given that the Court knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Defendant saw the Writ of Summons, yet has not officially responded to the court here in the ~65 hours since the Writ of Summons, the Court is prepared to grant default judgment in this civil case.

The Plaintiff is granted 48 hours to argue in favor of why they believe punitive damages should be granted.
Once this answer is received (or the time has expired), and assuming that Defendant has still not appeared by then, the Court shall enter into recess pending Court Verdict.

 

[xXLordLyonXx]

Theft is an antisocial behavior that discourages citizens from traveling through those locations. It weakens commercial activity, and is a violation of the law, and although criminal charges may not be brought through a civil case, such negatively influential behavior deserves an associated punitive response to discourage a continuation of the behavior.

 

[jotoho]

Default Judgement​

Azalea Isles District Court, Civil Case (CV)

Case No. CV-26-32
Lysander Lyon v. Hies Kennick

Due to the continued lack of response by the Defendant to the Writ of Summons, more than 85 hours after summoning, the Court hereby grants Default Judgment in favor of the Plaintiff, with caveats.
Please be advised that this Default Judgement is entered based only on the facts and evidence presented by the Plaintiff, due to the Defendant's failure to appear.

The Court hereby grants the following relief:

1. Compensatory damages for stolen funds in the amount of $90.03.
2. Prorated legal damages in the amount of $500, for self-representing lawyer work estimated by the court to be roughly equal to half a week of typical litigation.

The Court notes that it does not grant the Plaintiff's requested punitive damages, because the punishment of alleged criminal action is usually a matter for law enforcement and criminal justice proceedings. Compared to precedent in Multi Man v. Carrot Guy (2026) CV 05, non-violent pickpocketing is also far less disruptive to public order than murder-robbery.

Should the Defendant fail to pay the court-ordered damages to the Plaintiff within 72 hours from now, the Plaintiff may use this ruling to request the Government facilitate such transaction, for example by seizing the funds from the Defendant's personal balance.

The Defendant is advised that they have at most 14 days from now to Motion to Vacate Default Judgement, after which this ruling shall be considered final. The Court is hereby adjourned.

Signed,
Hon. Judge Iturgen "jotoho" Bolir