#24-CM-0030 State of San Andreas v. Mike Luigi

[Terence Williams]

San Andreas Judicial Branch Docket Notice "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

---

• Honorable Judge Fitzgerald and pertaining parties,
  
  As is the Prosecution.
  
  Regards,
  
  Terence Williams
  Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  234-9321 — [email protected]

[Maximilian Fitzgerald]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF SCHEDULING

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Mike Luigi
#24-CM-0030

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on 23rd of February, 2025.
Be advised, due to the size of this case, I fully expect this to take 2+ hours

All parties in this case are encouraged to complete the following Scheduling Tool in an attempt to schedule a trial on the above case. When the scheduling tool has been completed by either party, please post on the docket stating as such.

In the event all parties have overlapping availability the Presiding Judge will determine the best date and time to have a trial take place and post a Notice of Trial informing all of the upcoming proceeding.

In the event some or all parties do not have overlapping availability, the Presiding Judge will continue to attempt to schedule the proceeding or seek alternative avenues to conclude the case.

If either party has the intentions of calling a witness to the stand during the proceeding they must inform the court by filing a Witness List at the time of filing their availability. If no Witness List is filed before the Notice of Trial is filed you will be unable to call a witness during the proceeding.


Respectfully,


Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
☎ 1-000-000
✉ [email protected]

[Terence Williams]

San Andreas Judicial Branch Docket Notice "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

---

• Honorable Judge Fitzgerald and pertaining parties,
  
  The Prosecution has filed for availability.
  
  Regards,
  
  Terence Williams
  Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  234-9321 — [email protected]

[Hugh Allgood]

Allgood Law 24-CM-0030 "Right Firm. Right Now"

---

• Honorable Maximilian Alexander Fitzgerald III,
  
  As has the Defense.

---

Respectfully,

Owner/Attorney
Allgood Law
(909) 235-6076 — [email protected]

[Maximilian Fitzgerald]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF TRIAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Mike Luigi
#24-CM-0030

A trial date was set on the above case on 01st of March, 2025.

In accordance with the availability reported by both parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 20:00 PM on Sunday 9th of March, Year at Rockford Hills City Hall, Carcer Way, Metro Los Santos, SA.

Both parties are ordered to be present in the Judges Chambers no later than 15 minutes prior to the above listed date for pretrial arrangements. If complications occur that must result in a delay or cancellation of the trial, you are ordered to inform the court no later than 12 hours prior to the above listed date.


So ordered,


Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
☎ 1-000-000
✉ [email protected]

[Maximilian Fitzgerald]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

ISSUANCE OF VERDICT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Mike Luigi
#25-CM-0030

A decision was reached in the above case on the 09th day of March, 2025.

During this case, the court has examined several key pieces of evidence presented by the prosecution. Among them are nine contracts between Mr. Luigi and various clients, each with differing wording, as well as text messages exchanged between Mr. Monk and an individual presumed to be Mr. Luigi.

Embezzlement Charge
Embezzlement is defined as "the fraudulent appropriation of funds or property belonging to another party". After careful review, the court finds no substantial evidence indicating that Mr. Luigi misappropriated any funds or property. The alleged asset seizures presented in this case lack accompanying contractual agreements, leaving the court with insufficient grounds to support a charge of embezzlement.

Attempted Extortion & Blackmail Charges
The prosecution submitted text message exchanges between Mr. Monk and an individual believed to be Mr. Luigi. The primary consideration here is whether Mr. Luigi attempted to unlawfully obtain property through force or intimidation. However, the court finds that the evidence presented fails to establish a definitive link between Mr. Luigi and the messages in question. While there is a possibility of his involvement, the burden of proof required to substantiate this charge has not been met.

Furthermore, even if the messages were authored by Mr. Luigi, the court notes that Mr. Monk had outstanding payments. Given this context, Mr. Luigi would have been well within his rights to escalate the matter to law enforcement if he believed he had been defrauded. The messages appear to outline potential consequences for non-payment under contractual terms, rather than making unlawful threats. Merely stating the repercussions of failing to fulfill a contractual obligation does not constitute a criminal act.

Contracts and Predatory Lending
The court has closely examined the nine contracts provided as evidence and finds them to be highly inadequate in their clarity and structure. However, the key determination to be made is whether these contracts qualify as predatory.

Predatory lending is generally defined as "the act of offering loans under unfair or fraudulent pretenses, often with the implied threat of violence or severe consequences in the event of non-compliance". While the majority of Mr. Luigi’s contracts barely meet only the most basic requirements, three contracts stand out due to a particularly concerning clause, which states:

"If the contract is breached, Total Bankers will seize the collateral, and the loan balance will remain until fully cleared."

Regardless of intent, the court finds this clause to be unfair and improper. Standard contractual templates dictate that collateral seizure is meant to offset the remaining loan balance, not serve as a punitive measure while still requiring full repayment. Given the overall deficiencies in the contracts, this specific clause is especially problematic.

---

In conclusion, while the court acknowledges significant issues with the contractual terms used by Mr. Luigi, the evidence presented does not sufficiently establish the charges of embezzlement, attempted extortion, or blackmail beyond a reasonable doubt.

It is with the above considerations that I issue the following verdict:

• On 3 counts of GM11 - Predatory Lending, I find the defendant, Mike Luigi, guilty.
• On 6 counts of GM11 - Predatory Lending, I find the defendant, Mike Luigi, not guilty.
• On the count of GF06 - Blackmail, I find the defendant, Mike Luigi, not guilty.
• On the count of GF09 - Embezzlement, I find the defendant, Mike Luigi, not guilty.
• On the count of GF05 - Attempted Extortion, I find the defendant, Mike Luigi, not guilty.

---

As a final note, this court strongly recommends that Mr. Luigi and his business adopt publicly notarized contract templates moving forward, both for their own protection and for the benefit of their clients. The contracts presented in this case serve as a poor example of proper contractual agreements and highlight the critical importance of clarity and fairness in financial dealings.

Let this case serve as a lesson to all regarding the necessity of understanding contractual obligations and ensuring that both parties retain properly executed copies of their agreements as well as having a witness to contract signings.

Thank you prosecution and defence for your extreme work on this long case.


Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
☎ 1-000-000
✉ [email protected]