IN THE
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
JAMESGARDAI,
Plaintiff,
v.
HONORIPEDIA,
Defendant.
Case No.
CIVIL COMPLAINT
CIVIL COMPLAINT
Plaintiff JamesGardai, for his complaint against Defendant Honoripedia, alleges as
follows:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff JamesGardai is a resident of the State of Ridgeway.
2. Defendant Honoripedia is a resident of the State of Ridgeway.
JURISDICTION & VENUE
3. The jurisdiction of the Court originates from Art. V, Sec. IV which states “There
shall be a Superior court which shall exercise original jurisdiction for all civil and criminal cases
or controversies…”
4. Venue is proper as the actions that took place as stated within this complaint
occurred in Ridgeway County or an area which is subject to the jurisdiction thereof.
INTRODUCTION
5. This action arises from the misuse of authority by a Sheriff’s Deputy, who, in
retaliation for receiving multiple lawful citations, triggered an internal affairs investigation
against another officer from a neighboring department, not to uphold integrity or for a violation
of procedure, but to frivolously punish.
6. After Plaintiff, an on-duty Captain with the Palmer Police Department, issued a
lawful citation to Defendant, also a sworn officer, Defendant did not pursue lawful or
administrative recourse. Instead, he weaponized the Internal Affairs Division of Plaintiff’s own
department–an office Plaintiff supervises in his capacity as Captain of the Special Operations
Bureau–by submitting a retaliatory and knowingly false complaint.
7. “The rule of law in our country began in the 1600s, when persons fled Europe in
order to have the freedom to practice whatever religion they choose. The common theme of all
religions is to follow the law because that is what good people do. It has been the tradition in our
country since the very beginning.”1
8. Yet, the rule of law “is both powerful and fragile.”2
9. This incident exemplifies the fragility of the rule of law when those entrusted
with enforcing it instead exploit their authority for personal vendettas. Rather than fostering
accountability and fairness, the Deputy’s actions undermine public trust and threaten the very
foundation of lawful governance. Such misuse of power cannot be tolerated if the principles of
justice and integrity are to be preserved.
10. The baselessness of Defendant’s complaint was confirmed when the Palmer
Police Department Internal Affairs Division, after a full investigation, exonerated Plaintiff of all
alleged misconduct. This outcome underscores that the complaint lacked merit from the outset
and was fueled by retaliation rather than fact.
11. Due to Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff has suffered reputationally, professionally,
monetarily, and was stripped of the chance to protect his beloved State during the State of
Ridgeway vs. State of Mayflower (Clark County) War due to the imposition of administrative
leave because of this complaint.
12. “[T]he public [has a] commitment to the rule of law,”3 and it is imperative that
those in positions of authority honor and uphold that commitment to maintain the legitimacy of
our legal system and protect the rights of all individuals.
3 Stephen Breyer, Making Our Democracy Work: A Judge’s View (2005).
2 Id.
1 Hon. T. W. Small (Ret.), The rule of law is powerful and fragile; it’s your job to protect it, Nat’l Jud. Coll. (May
18, 2020), https://www.judges.org/news-and-info/the-rule-of-law-is-powerful-and-fragile-its-your-job-to-protect-it/
13. Plaintiff obliged by these obligations, but Defendant did not. Now, he will have to
face the consequences of his actions.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
14. On or about the date of July 12th, 2025, Plaintiff was patrolling in the area of
Sterling within Ridgeway County.
15. Plaintiff was patrolling with Deputy Xotlkz of the Ridgeway County Sheriff’s
Office and Officer gramma12221 of the Milton City Police Department.
16. Plaintiff was operating a motor vehicle provided to him by Deputy Xotlkz.
17. On or about the date of July 12th, 2025, Honoripedia was patrolling in the area of
Sterling within Ridgeway County.
18. Upon information and belief, Honoripedia was utilizing his own motor vehicle
provided to him by the Ridgeway County Sheriff’s Office.
19. Honoripedia would travel towards the entrance of Sterling from the Ridgeway
National Guard intersection.
20. Honoripedia would change lanes into the turning lane without utilizing a turn
signal, in violation of R.C.C. § 7.19.
21. Plaintiff recognized and observed this traffic violation.
22. Plaintiff would conduct a traffic stop on Defendant.
23. Plaintiff had probable cause of a traffic violation, or, at the minimum, reasonable
suspicion to detain Defendant.
24. Plaintiff ordered Defendant to pull over to the right side of the road multiple
times.
25. Each time, Defendant would refuse to pull over to the right side of the road, in
violation of R.C.C. § 2.04.
26. Plaintiff would exit his vehicle and issue Honoripedia a citation for failing to
comply with his lawful order of pulling over to the right side of the road.
27. Plaintiff would continue the traffic stop.
28. The traffic stop was at night.
29. During the traffic stop, Honoripedia would drive without headlights at night, in
violation of R.C.C. § 7.17.
30. Plaintiff recognized and observed this traffic violation.
31. Plaintiff had probable cause of this traffic violation, or, at the minimum,
reasonable suspicion to detain Defendant for this traffic violation.
32. Plaintiff then cited Honoripedia for violations of R.C.C. §§ 7.17 and 7.19.
33. Plaintiff would then release him from detainment and allow him to leave.
34. Defendant then drove into the shoulder of the road.
35. Defendant then turned off his headlights at night time.
36. Defendant then drove without his headlights on at night time, in violation of
R.C.C. § 7.17.
37. Plaintiff recognized and observed this traffic violation.
38. Plaintiff would conduct a traffic stop on the Defendant.
39. Plaintiff had probable cause of a traffic violation, or, at the minimum, reasonable
suspicion to detain Defendant.
40. Plaintiff, as a result of the traffic stop, issued a citation to Defendant for violation
of R.C.C. § 7.17.
41. On or about the date of July 12th, 2025, Defendant would submit an Internal
Affairs Complaint against Plaintiff, stating:
On July 12th, 2025 at approximately 19:58 Palmer Police Captain JamesGardai pulled
me over within Sterling limits, near the Sterling Car Dealership. He then notified me to
pull to the right side of the road, in which I thought he was just trolling. He proceeded to
issue me a citation for failure to comply, in which at this point I realized this dude has
got to be completely idiotic and trolling, however I later find out he wasn't when he then
issues me another citation, this time for Failure to signal lane change, and then another
one for driving without headlights when required. I then turn on my headlights, pull over
to the right side of the road to notify my department command. At this point James gets
behind me again, starts another traffic stop, and issues me another citation for driving
without headlights at night, even though I was.
42. Defendant would attach his own recorded video from the incident, which shows
his point of view.
43. Defendant’s video showed no wrongdoing from Plaintiff's part, and contrary to
his statements in his complaint, shows him committing violations of law.
44. As a result of the complaint, Plaintiff was placed on administrative leave.
45. On July 19th, 2025, the Palmer Police Department Internal Affairs Division
exonerated Plaintiff of any and all alleged or possible policy violations.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Abuse of Process - 1 R. Stat. § 3112)
46. The allegations in the previous paragraphs are incorporated as reference as if
fully set forth herein.
47. Pursuant to 1 R. Stat. § 3112, “[a]ny individual who abuses a legal process such
as a court proceeding or administrative proceeding by means of providing vexatious, fraudulent,
or frivolous complaints to get another in trouble shall be liable for injunctive relief and punitive
damages up to $5,000.”
48. Plaintiff became a party to an administrative proceeding as defined under 1 R.
Stat. § 3112(i). This administrative proceeding was initiated by Defendant when he submitted
his complaint to the Palmer Police Department Internal Affairs Division.
49. The complaint was wholly without merit. Honoripedia provided a frivolous,
fraudulent, and vexatious complaint against JamesGardai, falsely alleging that he was “trolling,”
issuing baseless citations, and wrongfully conducting multiple traffic stops.
50. However, the video Defendant attached to his complaint, which was created and
maintained by him, directly contradicts his own allegations. It shows the Plaintiff issuing
citations in response to clear and repeated traffic violations committed by the Defendant himself,
including failure to signal a lane change, failure to comply with lawful orders, and operating a
vehicle without headlights at night in violation of R.C.C. §§ 7.17 and 7.19.
51. Despite this, Defendant knowingly submitted false information and omitted
relevant facts from his complaint. The fact that Defendant’s own submitted video evidence
contradicts his narrative demonstrates malice, or, at minimum, a reckless disregard for the truth.
52. Defendant’s intent was not to redress any legitimate grievances, but to instead
retaliate against the Plaintiff for issuing lawful citations.
53. The defendant targeted the plaintiff and submitted the complaint without proper
justification and with the objective to get the plaintiff in trouble without just cause and with the
ulterior motive to punish Plaintiff for executing his lawful duties.
54. As a direct result of Defendant’s abuse of the administrative process, Plaintiff
was placed on administrative leave, suffered reputational damage, incurred emotional distress,
and has been deprived of his ability to carry out his official duties as Captain of the Special
Operations Bureau.
55. Though Plaintiff was ultimately exonerated of any wrongdoing by the Internal
Affairs Division, the process itself inflicted substantial reputational and professional harm, and
its initiation was rooted in a retaliatory motive rather than a legitimate concern.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Defamation - Restatement (2d) of Torts)
56. The allegations in the previous paragraphs are incorporated as reference as if
fully set forth herein.
57. The Restatement (2d) of Torts defines defamation as:
a. a false and defamatory statement concerning another;
b. an unprivileged publication to a third party;
c. fault amounting to at least negligence on part of the publisher; and
d. special harm caused by the publication
58. Defendant Honoripedia published a written statement to the Palmer Police
Department Internal Affairs Division falsely accusing Plaintiff of unprofessional and unlawful
conduct during a traffic stop.
59. Specifically, Defendant asserted that Plaintiff conducted baseless traffic stops,
issued unjustified citations, and engaged in “trolling” behavior. Defendant further characterized
Plaintiff as “completely idiotic” and acting in bad faith.
60. These statements were false and defamatory. Defendant’s own submitted video
evidence contradicts his narrative and instead confirms that Plaintiff conducted lawful traffic
stops based on observed violations of Ridgeway County Code, including but not limited to
R.C.C. §§ 7.17, 7.19, and 2.04.
61. Moreover, the Palmer Police Department's Internal Affairs Division, after
reviewing the very evidence submitted by Defendant, concluded that Plaintiff had not violated
any policy or engaged in misconduct, further confirming the falsity and defamatory nature of
Defendant's statements.
62. Defendant Honoripedia published these false and defamatory statements to a
third party, being the Palmer Police Department’s Internal Affairs Division and those overseeing
it or who otherwise have access to channels which house the defendant’s complaint.
63. Defendant acted with actual malice in submitting this complaint. He either knew
that his statements were false, as they were contradicted by his own submitted video, or acted
with reckless disregard for the truth, by deliberately ignoring or misrepresenting objective
evidence that disproved his claims. See New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964).
64. As a result of the publication of the false complaint, the plaintiff has suffered
reputational harm, been placed on administrative leave, lost payment, suffered professional
harm, and incurred emotional distress.
PRAYERS FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, the plaintiff requests that the court grant relief as follows:
65. A declaratory judgment that Defendant is liable for abuse of process;
66. A declaratory judgment that Defendant defamed Plaintiff;
67. Injunctive relief enjoining Defendant from making or publishing further
defamatory statements concerning Plaintiff;
68. Injunctive relief enjoining Defendant from engaging in further acts of abuse of
process;
69. Compensatory damages for reputational, emotional, and economic harm;
70. Punitive damages;
71. All court costs and fees; and
72. Any other relief that the court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted.
Date: 07/20/2025
_________________________________
JamesGardai, Esq.
Rid. Bar. No. 10244
Palmer, Ridgeway
D: fishfromocean
