SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
CITATION: PrimaQuorum v. Dominic8u, et al.,
2022 RSC 596
DATE OF JUDGEMENT:
August 10, 2022
BETWEEN:
PrimaQuorum
Plaintiff
and
Dominic8u, Ridgeway Department of State
Defendants
REASONS FOR DEFAULT ORDER AND MANDATORY INJUNCTION
OF THE
HONOURABLE JUDGE KOALAMEDVEDEVA
I. Chronology
[1] The chronology of this matter is as follows:
• August 4, 2022: Complaint is filed and served upon the defendant.
Summons was also delivered to the defendant. Solicitor General’s Office
intervenes. 48 hours allocated for an answer to the Complaint.
• August 6, 2022: Deadline to answer extended to August 9, 2022.
• August 9, 2022: Defendant fails to file an answer to the Complaint before
the deadline. Plaintiff applies for a default order under Rule 37.
II. The Complaint
[2] Plaintiff PrimaQuorum filed an action against the Ridgeway Department of
State and its statutory department head, Secretary of State Dominic8u on two causes of
action. The first, official misconduct, is derived from the s. 1(n) of the Civil Claims
Act. The second is a constitutional cause of action derived from art. 1, s. 3 of the state
Constitution.
[3] s. 1(n) of the Civil Claims Act provides:
“Any individual who is a public servant and commits an act relating to his office
but constitutes an unauthorized exercise of his official functions, knowing that
such act is unauthorized; or refrains from performing a duty which is imposed
upon him by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of his office.”
[4] art 1, s. 3 of the state Constitution provides:
“That all power being originally inherent in and co[n]sequently derived from
the people, therefore, all officers of government, whether legislative or
executive, are their trustees and servants; and at all times, in a legal way,
accountable to them.”
[5] On those bases, the Complaint was accepted.
[6] Plaintiff also applied for the Complaint to be construed as a petition for a
prerogative writ in the nature of mandamus. That application was denied.
III. Default Order
[7] Rule 37 of the Ridgeway Rules of Civil Procedure provides:
“When a party against whom a judgement for affirmative relief is sought has
failed to plead or otherwise defend as provided by these rules and that fact is
made to appear by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk shall enter his default.”
[8] Defendants did appear but have not plead within or beyond the 5 days allotted
to them for that purpose.
[9] Given these circumstances, I am satisfied that plaintiff is entitled to a default
order under Rule 37 and will enter the defendants’ default on both causes of action and,
for the purposes of these proceedings, assume all allegations in the Complaint as true
and that defendants are liable and concede the allegations as true.
[10] Defendants are therefore found to be liable of official misconduct in refraining
from performing various statutory duties.
IV. Relief
[11] The default order awards judgement to the plaintiff on both causes of action and
all relief awarded will, accordingly, be as a result of default on both causes of action.
[12] I will issue a mandatory injunction under the authority of s. 1(n)(ii) of the Civil
Claims Act as a result of the default order.
[13] I will issue an order for costs to be awarded to the plaintiff as a result of the
default order.
[14] The mandatory injunction is limited to the extent such that it alleviates
individual injury as the result of defendants’ conduct as opposed to institutional injury
which may or may not have been a result of that same conduct. For greater certainty, I
make no finding as to the latter.
[15] In my view, declaratory judgement is not appropriate. Due to the nature of the
default order the defendants are assumed to have conceded the allegations, leaving no
dispute which must be resolved between the parties. It is therefore denied.
V. Mandatory Injunction
[16] In this part, a reference to the defendant or defendants is a reference to
Dominic8u in quasi-official capacity and the Department of State for which he is the
statutory department head.
[17] Whereas defendants failed to adequately maintain a state register of all policies
and regulations of all departments in a manner consistent with s. 4.2(a-c) of the State
Administration Act as part of their statutory duties as alleged in the Complaint, they
have impeded plaintiff’s access to department policies and regulations. Although the
Complaint does not allege a complete inability to access the documentation, in my
view, defendants’ omissions and failure to render the documentation readily available
have made it substantially harder for the plaintiff to do so. He is therefore entitled to
relief as a result of personal injury.
[18] I order that the defendants make available on the state register the policies and
regulations of the Law Enforcement Training Centre, Sheriff’s Office, Fire
Department, Palmer Police Department, Transit Authority, National Guard, Park
Service, State Police, Milton City Police Department, Department of Justice, and
Department of State except any policies and regulations which are unavailable,
sensitive, or otherwise exempted from publication pursuant to s. 4.2(d-e) of the State
Administration Act. I further order that defendants certify compliance with this order
on or before August 24, 2022.
[19] Whereas defendants failed to adequately maintain a state reporter of court cases
and decisions in a manner consistent with s. 4.3 of the State Administration Act as part
of their statutory duties as alleged in the Complaint, they have impeded plaintiff’s
access to court records. Plaintiff alleges that he has struggled to study for the Bar exam
as a result of not being able to access legal documents which he alleges should have
been compiled and made readily available by defendants. He is therefore entitled to
relief as a result of personal injury.
[20] I order that the defendants make available on the state reporter the decisions of
the Administrative Court, the decisions of the Supreme Court, the cases where the
Supreme Court has granted review, the trial records of trials in the Superior Court, and
all orders of the Superior Court in a manner consistent with s. 4.3 of the State
Administration Act. I further order that defendants certify compliance with this order
on or before August 24, 2022.
[21] Whereas defendants failed to adequately codify the state’s statute law in a
manner consistent with s. 4.1(a) of the State Administration Act as part of their statutory
duties as alleged in the Complaint, they have impeded plaintiff’s accessibility to the
state’s laws. To this extent, the plaintiff alleges his ability to study for the Bar, hold
legislators accountable, follow the law, and ensure he is treated within the bounds of
the law have been limited. While I accept plaintiff’s own concession that these statutes
have still been made available by the Senate, in my view, the defendants’ omissions
still caused an identifiable, albeit marginal, difficulty for the plaintiff. He is therefore
entitled to relief as a result of personal injury.
[22] I order that the defendants make available on the Code of Statutes all laws
which have been passed and continue to make available on the Code of Statutes any
new laws upon their passage in a manner consistent with s. 4.1 of the State
Administration Act. I further order that defendants certify compliance with this order
on or before August 24, 2022.
[23] Whereas defendants failed to adequately maintain miscellaneous archives in a
manner consistent with s. 4.4 of the State Administration Act as part of their statutory
duties as alleged in the Complaint, they have refrained from performing a duty imposed
upon them by law. The facts in the Complaint, in my view, do not give rise to personal
injury as to this claim. However, defendants conceded plaintiff’s standing to sue for
this claim, and as a result, plaintiff is entitled to relief.
[24] I order that the defendants make available, as part of miscellaneous the archives,
oaths of elected officials, oaths of officials confirmed by the Senate, all treaties,
journals of all legislative meetings, all dishonourable discharges, and all persons
convicted in a court of law, the crimes they were convicted of, and their sentence in a
manner consistent with s. 4.4 of the State Administration Act. I further order that the
defendants maintain a backup of each of the state’s boards made via. the Trello-
Atlassian Enterprise and of each of the state’s documents in a manner consistent with
s. 4.4 of the State Administration Act. I further order that defendants certify compliance
with this order on or before August 31, 2022.
[25] Whereas defendants failed to adequately publish state publications in a manner
consistent with s. 5 of the State Administration Act as part of their statutory duties as
alleged in the Complaint, they have refrained from performing a duty imposed upon
them by law. The facts in the Complaint, in my view, do not give rise to personal injury
as to this claim. However, defendants conceded plaintiff’s standing to sue for this
claim, and as a result, plaintiff is entitled to relief.
[26] I order that the defendants publish henceforth, as part of state publications,
video media, newsletters, newsfeeds, and advertisements to the extent defendants find
appropriate and in a manner consistent with s. 5 of the State Administration Act. I make
no specific order as the facts in the Complaint do not give rise to a specific failure on
the defendants’ part that the plaintiff desires to have remedied. I further order that
defendants certify compliance with this order on or before August 31, 2022
[27] Whereas defendants failed to adequately manage the state’s commerce in a
manner consistent with s. 2.2(a) of the State Administration Act as part of their statutory
duties as alleged in the Complaint, they have impeded plaintiff’s accessibility to
opportunities, employment, and services—particularly because defendants allegedly
failed to ensure activity of businesses operational in the state. He is therefore entitled
to relief as a result of personal injury.
[28] I order that the defendants assess the activity of businesses currently operating
within the state. I further order that defendants issue formal warning for all businesses
currently operating within the state showing no activity for 2 weeks or in excess of 2
weeks. I further order that defendants certify compliance with this order on or before
August 24, 2022
[29] In my view, the facts alleged in the Complaint at paras. 87-91 do not amount to
refrainment from performing a duty imposed by law. Although the State Administration
Act prescribes the Secretary of State jurisdiction over foreign affairs, there is no
command to act in a certain way. When accepting the facts alleged as true, I do not find
a dereliction of duty on the part of and traceable to the defendants as to this claim.
There will be no order as to this claim.
[30] This mandatory injunction is a result of the near complete dereliction of
statutory duty on the part of the defendants based on the facts alleged in the Complaint
and conceded by the defendants. Accordingly, nothing in this mandatory injunction
directs the defendants to perform any action not already imposed upon them by law or
inherent in the nature of their office. To the extent that it does, it may be set aside on
application.
VI. Costs
[31] I will award petitioner filing fees of $125.00 and attorney fees of $1220.00 for
a total cost award of $1345.00 to be paid by Dominic8u on or before August 17, 2022.
VII. Setting Aside Default
[32] Notwithstanding any stipulations in this part, all judgements and orders
contained within this ruling are effective immediately unless otherwise provided.
[33] Defendants may apply to set aside this default order if they substantially comply
with the summons, appear in chambers to provide an acceptable reason for failing to
plead, and file an answer to the Complaint on or before August 11, 2022.
Dated at the City of Palmer, in the State of Ridgeway this 10th day of August, 2022.
“koalaMedvedeva”
Judge koalaMedvedeva
Counsel for the plaintiff PrimaQuorum: CIifford2 and turntable5000,
Ridgeway.
Counsel for the defendants Dominic8u and Ridgeway Department of State:
totoro987123 and Tony_Giordano, Ridgeway.
