Rendered from the court's authenticated repository
Searchable full text
7,973 characters extracted
—
1
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF RIDGEWAY FOR RIDGEWAY COUNTY
Arthur_Chen :
:
Plaintiff :
:
vs. : Case No.: RSC-CV-________
:
largetitanic2, in his official capacity as President :
of the Ridgeway State Senate :
:
PeepGPT, in his official capacity as Sergeant-at- :
Arms of the Ridgeway State Senate :
:
Defendant :
__________________________________________:
COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, Arthur_Chen, proceeding without counsel, respectfully submits the
foregoing complaint to this Honorable Court and in support thereof alleges as follows:
I. The Parties to This Complaint
a. The Plaintiff(s)
1. ARTHUR_CHEN (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) is a resident of Ridgeway County, Ridgeway
and citizen of the United States.
b. The Defendant(s)
2. LARGETITANIC2 (hereinafter “Defendant Titanic”) is the incumbent Lieutenant
Governor of the State of Ridgeway. Pursuant to Article III, Section VI of the
Constitution of the State of Ridgeway, the Lieutenant Governor serves as the President
of the State. He is sued in his official capacity.
3. PEEPGPT (hereinafter “Defendant Peep”) is the incumbent Sergeant-at-Arms of the
Senate of the State of Ridgeway. He is sued in his official capacity.
2
II. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Pursuant to Article V, Section IV of the Constitution of the State of Ridgeway, this court
is vested with the authority to entertain and adjudicate “all civil or criminal cases or
controversies.”
5. Venue is proper as the incident giving rise to the present litigation occurred within the
geographical bounds of Milton, a municipality situated within Ridgeway County, and
thus subject to the jurisdiction and laws of the State of Ridgeway.
III. Statement of Facts
6. On March 8, 2026, at approximately 8:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, the Senate of the
State of Ridgeway (hereinafter “Senate”) convened at the State House in Milton,
Ridgeway.
7. Defendant Titanic was the presiding officer, exercising his authority as President of the
Senate.
8. Plaintiff, who was displeased with the actions of the Senate, proceeded to stand upon a
railing in the Senate’s gallery and began performing a dance known as the “buri-buri.”
9. The “buri-buri” is a sequence of expressive physical movements in which an individual
faces away from observers, bends forward at the waist, places their hands on or near the
buttocks, and proceeds to wiggle or shake the hips in an exaggerated manner while
moving in a side-to-side walking motion.
10. Plaintiff continued performing the “buri-buri” for several minutes while stating, in-
game, that he was displeased with the Senate.
11. After several minutes of performing the dance, a Senator moved that the Plaintiff be
held in contempt of the Senate for his “disruptive behavior.”
3
12. The motion passed, and the Defendant Titanic directed Defendant Peep to hold the
Plaintiff in contempt of the Senate.
13. Defendant Peep held the Plaintiff in contempt and placed him in a holding cell beneath
the Capitol for an extended period of time.
14. Rule V § 3 of the Standing Rules of the Senate state that “Whenever the Senate deems,
under statutory authority, that a person has engaged in contemptuous behaviour, they
may by a two-thirds (⅔) vote, hold them in contempt of the Senate and direct the
Sergeant-at-Arms to take them into custody.”
15. Contempt of the Senate is defined in statute as “Any person who, without lawful
justification, fails to appear after being issued any lawful, senatorial subpoena, writ or
command; or the act of obstructing any session of whole and or partial Senate.” R.C. C.
§ 2.15
16. Plaintiff was not served with any subpoena, writ, or command nor directed to appear
before the Senate.
17. At no point did Defendant Peep, Defendant Titanic, or any Senator allege, state, declare,
or otherwise pronounce that Plaintiff’s physical or verbal expressions from the gallery
were obstructive.
IV. Causes of Action
COUNT I - FALSE INPRISONMENT
(Against Defendant Peep)
18. Paragraphs 6-17 of this Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference.
19. Defendant Titanic directed and caused the Sergeant-at-Arms to detain Plaintiff for
contempt.
4
20. Defendant Titanic’s direction was intended to cause Plaintiff's detention and did in fact
cause it.
21. Plaintiff was intentionally detained and confined in a holding cell beneath the Capitol
for an extended period. Because the detention lacked lawful authority as applied (no
obstruction as alleged), Defendant Titanic is liable as a procuring/directing tortfeasor
COUNT II - FALSE INPRISONMENT
(Procurement/Direction Theory - against Defendant largetitanic2)
22. Paragraphs 6-17 of this Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference.
23. Defendant Titanic directed and caused the Sergeant-at-Arms to detain Plaintiff for
contempt.
24. Defendant Titanic’s direction was intended to cause Plaintiff's detention and did in fact
cause it.
25. Because the detention lacked lawful authority as applied (no obstruction as alleged),
Defendant Titanic is liable as a procuring/directing tortfeasor
COUNT III – VIOLATION OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
(Against all Defendants)
26. Paragraphs 6-17 of this Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference.
27. Plaintiff’s conduct, including his expressive dance and verbal statements, constituted
protected expression.
28. Defendants took adverse action against Plaintiff by detaining him based on this
expressive conduct.
29. Plaintiff’s conduct did not constitute obstruction under applicable law and was not
otherwise unlawful.
5
30. Defendants’ actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by Plaintiff’s expression of
displeasure with the Senate.
31. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff suffered damages.
COUNT IV – VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS
(Against all Defendants)
32. Paragraphs 6-17 of this Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference.
33. Plaintiff possessed a protected liberty interest in being free from unlawful detention.
34. Defendants deprived Plaintiff of this liberty interest without due process of law.
35. Specifically, Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with notice of any charges, an
opportunity to be heard, or a lawful basis for the contempt determination prior to his
detention.
36. Defendants’ actions were arbitrary, capricious, and in violation of Plaintiff’s
constitutional rights.
37. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff suffered damages.
COUNT V – ULTRA VIRES ACTION
(Against all Defendants)
38. Paragraphs 6-17 of this Complaint are hereby incorporated by reference.
39. Defendants purported to exercise contempt powers under Rule V § 3 and R.C. C. § 2.15.
40. Said authority is limited to circumstances involving failure to comply with lawful
process or obstruction of Senate proceedings.
41. Plaintiff’s conduct did not fall within either category.
42. Accordingly, Defendants acted outside the scope of their lawful authority.
43. As a direct and proximate result of these ultra vires acts, Plaintiff suffered damages.
6
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in his
favor and against Defendants, and grant the following relief:
A. Judgment declaring that Defendants’ actions were unlawful and in violation of
Plaintiff’s rights;
B. Judgment declaring that the Contempt of Court citation was unlawful and in
violation of the law;
C. Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial for Plaintiff’s
unlawful detention;
D. Punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial against Defendants Titanic
and Peep for willful, malicious, and/or reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s rights;
E. Injunctive relief preventing Defendants and their agents from engaging in similar
unlawful detentions in the future;
F. Costs of suit incurred herein, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs;
and
G. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully Submitted,
_________________________
Hon. Arthur_Chen
1 Jackson Street
Palmer, RW 80013
D: arthur_chen
E: [email protected]
Pro Se Plaintiff
