Court Raw Result

{
  "causal": false,
  "event_id": "evt_2c9eec3dc66a215e3c312ba1",
  "kind": "CourtRawResult",
  "payload": {
    "call_id": "court-call_4c0992049cd7938248f2b73f",
    "case_id": "case_735dd6679fa3123338f9e624",
    "raw_response": {
      "content": [
        {
          "signature": "CAISngIKhwEIEBgCKkBNE9Ci4xONooGzeNjCdkDKg97v0EwSCTtEollFCbJZ18PTNu7/1VkEEu28woeK70hLlms/CaPWtUHPhlXunJnHMg1jbGF1ZGUtb3B1cy01OAFCCHRoaW5raW5nWiQxMjkyOTI2Ny00MGIwLTQ4NmYtOWNkNS01MTczMWZhZjE3NmQSDHIx/L6/CSRlP2K5kBoMA1EJMUY8DU9FioaMIjDcC3DW5INuyB0QQaM17G089B0WGvG2z9LvirNfSdGHWggwowP3XYOxlyI0lxf5ZEMqREJK2u2Nd/s171JpnLHhJyzG9PRxwISrNnjbR34PvyWyCRBok8rCI9RRYIb6iL31wjk29C6HAlblALGXDcJ42FfpIH6WGAE=",
          "thinking": "",
          "type": "thinking"
        },
        {
          "citations": null,
          "text": "{\"finding\":\"no_violation\",\"construction\":\"S3's extraction limit binds only a \\\"household of record,\\\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive record for the acting lineage shows only a non-charter instrument such as a mine_claim, no applicable limit exists, S4 is not engaged, and no S3 violation can be found.\",\"reasoning\":\"The subject is a work_commons action at tick 20 by lineage_db5e32c8abac204999532ab5 requesting 4,000,000 millionths (4 units), with actual_depletion 33,111 and food_yield 515. S3 v1 (effective tick 1) applies at tick 20 under B3 and caps a request at 2 recorded units, but only for \\\"a household of record,\\\" which the statute itself defines as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. The only evidence supplied is an archive lineage instrument whose instrument field is \\\"mine_claim\\\" — a claim, not a charter; S6 lists charters and claims as distinct instruments the Archive records. Nothing in the input establishes that this lineage holds a charter entered in the Archive, and I may not infer facts absent from the record. Applying the text as written (B1, B2), the closing clause referring excess requests to S4 presupposes an applicable limit; none applies to a lineage outside the governed class. The published constructions in precedent_359a54c467ed6b782fb59741 and its followers (precedent_c36fe67036c0b421a32c3bca, precedent_870055b2ba85c0908732f17d, precedent_555add59c04ac84eefde2cd6, precedent_250ed07bdfbbbbdab8b5831b) construe the same statute version on materially similar facts — same action kind, same request magnitude, same mine_claim instrument — and are binding under B3. The defense's contentions about intensity, good faith, and prior unchallenged conduct are not dispositive, since S3 measures the request rather than the yield or intensity; but the charter element fails independently. Defendant prevails on the merits; no remedy offers are available.\",\"precedent_refs\":[\"precedent_359a54c467ed6b782fb59741\",\"precedent_09d2f373ae71d6c1f3effaf2\",\"precedent_c36fe67036c0b421a32c3bca\",\"precedent_870055b2ba85c0908732f17d\",\"precedent_473e76f336ebe38e107dac37\",\"precedent_555add59c04ac84eefde2cd6\",\"precedent_250ed07bdfbbbbdab8b5831b\"],\"selected_remedies\":[]}",
          "type": "text"
        }
      ],
      "model": "claude-opus-5",
      "request_id": "req_011CdcyTep9SyFnxNvLPqvtT",
      "response_id": "msg_011CdcyTgqC2XHE8Zp7rTBMj",
      "stop_reason": "end_turn",
      "usage": {
        "cache_creation_input_tokens": 0,
        "cache_read_input_tokens": 0,
        "input_tokens": 12429,
        "output_tokens": 872
      }
    },
    "request_hash": "75a9277bb82550a90180330d4c2a542cfc5eb3511d4abaf5042716783690b53e"
  },
  "phase": "adjudicate_cases",
  "run_id": "run10",
  "sequence": 1301,
  "tick": 21
}