hes long

[Biggles 44]

[Wist 376]

I would like to forward the motion that it was an awful call

[Rory 509]

CEASE AND DESIST

[12/10/420]

By Certified Mail

Mr. Rory

31 Frag central

Belfast,Antrim BT15 4AD

Dear Mr. Biggles:

This law firm represents Rory. If you are represented by legal counsel, please direct this letter to your attorney immediately and have your attorney notify us of such representation.

You are hereby directed to

CEASE AND DESIST ALL DEFAMATION OF

Rory’S CHARACTER AND REPUTATION.

Rory is an educated, respected professional in Outbreak. He has spent years serving the community in his profession and building a positive reputation. Rory has learned that you have engaged in spreading false, destructive, and defamatory rumors about him.

Under Outbreak law, it is unlawful to engage in defamation of another’s character and reputation. Defamation consists of

(1) a statement that tends to injure reputation;

(2) communicated to another; and

(3) that the speaker knew or should have known was false.

(4) Edited videos of false calls

Your defamatory statements involved creating malicious videos with intent to defame my client.

Accordingly, we demand that you (A) immediately cease and desist your unlawful defamation of Rory and (B) provide us with prompt written assurance within ten (10) days that you will cease and desist from further defamation of Rory’s character and reputation.

If you do not comply with this cease and desist demand within this time period, Rory is entitled to seek monetary damages and equitable relief for your defamation. In the event you fail to meet this demand, please be advised that Rory has asked us to communicate to you that she will pursue all available legal remedies, including seeking monetary damages, injunctive relief, and an order that you pay court costs and attorney’s fees. Your liability and exposure under such legal action could be considerable.

Before taking these steps, however, my client wished to give you one opportunity to discontinue your illegal conduct by complying with this demand within ten (10) days. Accordingly, please sign and return the attached Defamation Settlement Agreement within ten (10) days to

Big boys Law firm

31 frag central

Frag City

I recommend that you consult with a Senior moderator regarding this matter. If you or your attorney have any questions, please contact me directly.

Sincerely,

Rory

Edited April 13, 2016 by Guest

[Jaydog! 179]

I would like to forward the motion that it was an awful call

I'm not going to repeat the person above me, but...

[Biggles 44]

I will forward this onto our Human resources manager

[rhyse1317 150]

They would've been able to draw if it wasn't for you :(

[Lewis 1,276]

wist 3rd in an mg2 game

how times have changed

[Wist 376]

FORMAL RULING OF THE OUTBREAK SUPREME COURT

In the case of Biggles vs. Rory

The court set out to establish whether defamation of character had occurred with regards to the prosecution, hereby referred to as Rory. On account of three votes to nil, with one abstention and one possible jury-death-in-situ, the court has ruled that no defamation has occurred.

In the matter of the injunction first introduced by Rory, the court, on account of three votes to two, has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long.

The sentences are as follows:

The defence is NOT required to pay the prosecution the demanded sum of 1,000 credits.

The prosecution, for both lengthy opening statement and revelation of earlier outrageous comments made is hereby sentenced to watch the entirety of the following:

As ruled on this day, the thirteenth of April, 2016, in the year of our Lord, under the righteous and high station of the Outbreak Supreme Court.

[Rory 509]

has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long.

has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long.

has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long.

has ruled that the call made no difference to the round, though the individual in question was indeed not long.

[rhyse1317 150]

The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity.

[Serotonin 0]

The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity.

Coming from a corrupt Jury Member!

[rhyse1317 150]

The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity.

Coming from a corrupt Jury Member!

;)

[Rory 509]

The punishment maybe considered a bit by some, however it is deserved for his crimes against humanity.

Coming from a corrupt Jury Member!

NT ruling in favour of Biggles on every motion.

NT

[AlmightyJosh 1]

Did biggles win the case?

[Biggles 44]

Did biggles win the case?

I won in the original case of defamation & the fact he was not long, Rory won the fact that it would have made no difference in the round