Pleading form with 28 lines

12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728Cody A. Fitchcodyafitch@gmail.com4902 Fifth Street, Santa Ana, CA 92703MODERATORS OF THE NETHERLANDS DUTCH EMBASSY OF LOS aNGELES CODY A FITCH,Plaintiff,vs.

DUTCH DEFENSE LEAGUE , DOES 1-350Defendant))))))Case No.: IMPLIED FACT CONTRACT, CONTRACT FORMATION, BREACH OF CONTRACT, UNJUST ENRICHMENT IMPLIED-IN-LAW OR QUASI-CONTRACT

I. PARTIES, VENUE, JURISDICTIONCody A Fitch lives Santa Ana, CADutch Defense League lives in the Netherlands. II. FACTUAL BACKGROUNDThe Dutch Defense League was followed by the Plaintiff on twitter a social market place communication area. The Dutch League Defense then followed him back. He then sent them a solicitation for counseling to deal with issues of defending their lands. This included his abilities of war counseling. They then replied in a matter of negotiating that they do not know him and they do not pay. So the Plaintiff thought that it was negotiations of contacts for services. As they showed interest by following him and saying they do not know whim and bringing up costs. So he then sent them a service intellectual property outline worth billions. Which is a legal way to arrest bad guys without having to use the officers or military or police. Which if done properly could gain them billions in assets if properly done. The exact words, where the Plaintiff was followed they showed interest, he solicited for servie of IPOs, they responded with interest of knowing them and costs, by saying they did not know him and they do not pay. So that sounded to the Plaintiff like they usually get to know folks first and then they do not pay for intellectual property. So he then sent them an intellectual property service for them to consume. At that point they did not tell him not to to stop soliciging and showed interest. The Plaintiff sent an intellectual property outline that was consumed and now is in their mind at the point of reading. So the Plaintiff is thus in need of fees for his service. The Defendants at any time of the request for service IPOs could have requested him not to sell the products to them or not to send them. However, they made statements of sounding to want to meet and negotiate costs. As the Plaintiff had sent his fees and they sent what they were willing to pay. The Plaintiff has had many job interviews working for intellectual property outline firms. Where they just simple sent out their ideas to patrons or people who were listening and they used them or consumed them and sent money. III. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION(IMPLIED FACT CONTRACT)California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI)In deciding whether a contract was created, you should consider the conduct and relationship of the parties as well as all the circumstances of the case. The conduct in this case was one that the Plaintiff waited until the followed him. Then the asked for fees and services to be sold. They then responded with ideas of meeting and knowing and included ideas of cost they were willing to pay, after the Plaintiff had asked for costs. Contracts can be created by the conduct of the parties, without spoken or written words. Contracts created by conduct are just as valid as contracts formed with words. The conduct was inductive of entering into negotiations. In which during negations products are usually shared and costs of that product are argued. Conduct will create a contract if the conduct of both parties is intentional and each knows, or has reason to know, that the other party will interpret the conduct as an agreement to enter into a contract. It is more than reasonable to think that if somebody requested a fee and a service to be sold, then the person responded with meeting ideas, and costs they are willing to pay that negations of a contract where begging and that a product should be sold and the cost argued for that product. The Fair Market Value of this IPO as a major crime fighting security banking IPO is around $1 million for a security banker intellectual property service to a crime fighting guild. The Defendant has yet to respond to the request for payments after entering an implied contract relationship for the services rendered. California Appellate Court inCopeland v. Baskin Robbins U.S.A., 96 Cal. App. 4th 1251, 1253 (2002). In this case, the court found that as a practical matter, the law was required, for public policy reasons, to recognize and enforce agreements to negotiate.II. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION(CONTRACT FORMATION)302. Contract FormationEssential Factual Elements Plaintiff claims that the parties entered into a implied good faith contract and dealings. To prove that a contract was created, Plaintiff must prove all of the following:1. That the contract terms were clear enough that the parties could understand what each was required to do: The Plaintiff spoke about services of intellectual property and costs and the Defendant spoke about meetings and knowing each other and costs of services. 2. That the parties agreed to give each other something of value [a promise to do something or not to do something may have value]: The Parties agreed to service intellectual property as they where agreeing to costs and the service of ideas. In which the Plaintiff sent his intellectual property service worth $1 million of crime fighting security banking during the negotiations of the contract. 3. That the parties agreed to the terms of the contract. The Defendant had agreed to negotiation contracts of costs and meeting as per their statements of not knowing and they would not pay. Which is a contract to begin negotiations of service contract. In which the Plaintiff sent a service in good faith to them as we were in contracted negotiations of service fees. When you examine whether the parties agreed to the terms of the contract, ask yourself if, under the circumstances, a reasonable person would conclude, from the words and conduct of each party, that there was an agreement. You may not consider the parties hidden intentions. The Plaintiff and the Defendant entered into negotiations about a servie of intellectual property one had stated costs and the other stated costs and then the Plaintiff sent a product to be consumed while arguing the contract of service fees was being formed, and was formed. III. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION(BREACH OF CONTRACT)303. Breach of ContractEssential Factual ElementsTo recover damages from Defendant for breach of contract, Plaintiff must prove all of the following:1. That Plaintiff and Defendant entered into an implied quasi contract;2. That Plaintiff did all, or substantially all, of the significant things that the quasi contract required him to do her was excused from doing those things like negotiating costs and meetings. 3. That all conditions required by the contract for Defendants performance to enter into good faith fair dealings of following the Plaintiff on his marketing twitter cite, and also talking about costs and meetings had occurred. 4. That Defendant failed to do something that the quasi good faith fair dealings contract required him to do. Which was finish the talks about the service provided and the contract that they had entered into. 5. That Plaintiff was harmed by that failure the respond after the Plaintiff had sent them a muti billion dollar security banking intellectual property outline. So he could negotiate the costs of the service of the product of his minds work provided them. IV. FORTH CAUSE OF ACTION(UNJUST ENRICHMENT IMPLIED-IN-LAW OR QUASI-CONTRACT)The plaintiff seeks to recover the value ofintellectual property outline of a security banking maneuver against foreign platoons that maneuver crime to hurt local Dutch citizens. He provided because the defendant was unjustly enriched by the plaintiff's provision ofthe intellectual property while the two issues at hand where negotiation for meetings and costs. Unjust enrichment means that it is contrary to equity and good conscience for the defendant to retain a benefit that has come to the defendant at the expense of the plaintiff.To find unjust enrichment, you must find that the plaintiff has providedthe intellectual property of the banking security outline maneuver that the defendant has benefited from thosethe outline as read is anything that a team of criminal justice fighters like the Dutch Defense League would easily see as a platform for security banking they could make millions on by fighting crime in the manner of the IPO sent to them and consumed. That the defendant unjustly did not pay for that benefit, and that the defendant's failure to pay hurt the plaintiff.[ For you to find for the plaintiff under this legal principle, you must first find that there was no written or oral contract expressed in words and no contract implied by conduct for the plaintiff to providethe sercurity banking intellectual property outline. If you find that there was a contract for the plaintiff to providesecurity banking intellectual property outline you may not find that the defendant was unjustly enriched.]AuthorityMeaney v. Connecticut Hospital Assn., 250 Conn. 500, 511 (1999);Hartford Whalers Hockey Club v. Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co., 231 Conn. 276, 283 (1994);Bershtein, Bershtein & Bershtein v. Nemeth, 221 Conn. 236, 242 (1992);National CSS, Inc. v. Stamford, 195 Conn. 587, 597 (1985);Brighenti v. New Britain Shirt Corp., 167 Conn. 403, 407 (1974). For a discussion of instructions for cases in which the plaintiff has pleaded contract and unjust enrichment claims in the alternative, seeMeaney v. Connecticut Hospital Assn., 250 Conn. 500, 515-23 (1999), andSuffield Development Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Society for Savings, 243 Conn. 832, 846 (1998).Thus if the Moderator finds that there was a implied contract the Defense has breached the Contract. However, if there was no contract implied then the Defendant has unjustly enriched themselves by entering negations with the Plaintiff and receiving a security intellectual property outline. PRAYER The Plaintiff prays the Dutch Defense League finish the negotiations for intellectual property payments for services as he has already rendered a muti-billion dollar security banking intellectual property outline and believes he could help the Dutch defend themselves from the foreign culture that invade them. The Plaintiff Prays for $1 million for the intellectual property service rendered of the security banking outline teaching them how to take from the bad drug dealers in a foreign culture. Where in the Dutch they have trillions in illegal Muslim drug dealing contraband and assets. That the Dutch Defense League could easily begin to sue for in civil lawsuits and gain the funds for the Plaintiff to get his Intellectual Property Security Banking Idea paid for.

_________________________Cody A FitchABA Certified - 1