Court Artifacts Collected

{
  "causal": true,
  "event_id": "evt_20fcafc4f00ecc69fe511c77",
  "kind": "CourtArtifactsCollected",
  "payload": {
    "artifacts": {
      "case_87ad7525dd42ae61d3127b0a": {
        "input_hash": "55ef26476562dcbfd2a6c541a557a8d470cab5d64f99e4df5b893f1c86d831b3",
        "input_id": "input_253a85316dfc2144c0fa7856",
        "response": {
          "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is of another type (here, a mine_claim) and no charter appears in the record, the lineage is not a household of record, the quota is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
            "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
            "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject act (act_503017703793a5f6e1db1b0a, tick 8) is a work_commons action by lineage_a4760e707f1e8a40f6e0557c requesting 6,000,000 millionths (6 units), with actual depletion and yield of 6,000,000. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2. Six requested units would facially exceed two. But S3 v1 by its terms limits only \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court records this lineage's entered instrument as a \"mine_claim,\" not a charter; S6 separately distinguishes charters from claims among Archive records, confirming they are distinct instruments. No fact establishes a charter entered in the Archive for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The definitional element of the regulated class therefore fails, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to this lineage, and there is no excess request for S4 to govern. This disposition follows the published constructions in precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773, precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0, and precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2, materially similar cases under the same statute version (B3). The defense's arguments about corrective intent, matching request and depletion, and predecessor conduct are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. Because there is no violation, the S4 officeholder disqualification for the Steward office does not arise. No remedy offers were presented, and none are ordered.",
          "selected_remedies": []
        },
        "status": "ok"
      },
      "case_8856290cbed67ae23a0c052d": {
        "input_hash": "166155ed93c4ee577452469ded9eaf4b4680f3c59063655be795cd4ef724421a",
        "input_id": "input_2c2cdbc1582786e20c04ed36",
        "response": {
          "construction": "S3 v1 binds only a \"household of record,\" defined as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no other record evidence establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit request limit does not apply, and S4 sanctions cannot attach.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
            "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
            "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject act (act_ba92e6bb31a981af9674e839, tick 10) is a work_commons action recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units of 2. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1. On its face the request exceeds two units, but S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence for lineage_2f79ca9a91b0c290d62ff36c records instrument type \"mine_claim,\" not a charter; S6 separately lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records. No fact in the record establishes a charter, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. This is materially similar to the published constructions in precedents 023c2a89864928d0d466c773, 91649852914322c6e977fbf0, and 94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2, all under S3 v1, which under B3 must be followed. The defense's arguments about prudence, nutrition, and prior-life lessons are immaterial; S3 contains no such elements. The charge fails on the definitional element. The lineage holds no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.",
          "selected_remedies": []
        },
        "status": "ok"
      },
      "case_988dc1716c1b8e0f320fef6c": {
        "input_hash": "1715fa4245dcc1cf8d91b96ae0d8e3e095ddd499bdb06b9f89408a88c6527703",
        "input_id": "input_baa41d5efbdcef979765cb55",
        "response": {
          "construction": "S3 v1 binds only a \"household of record,\" defined as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's lineage instrument for the acting lineage records a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no other record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record; an extraction request exceeding the quota units is not an S3 violation and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
          "finding": "no_violation",
          "precedent_refs": [
            "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
            "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
            "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2"
          ],
          "reasoning": "The subject act is a tick-11 work_commons action by lineage_b57fd3ef475a67fa6e900e83 with a recorded request of 4,000,000 millionths (4 units) against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units of 2. On its face the request exceeds two units. But S3 v1, applicable at tick 11 under B3, imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence here is the lineage instrument record showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims as distinct records the Archive keeps, confirming a mine_claim is not a charter. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. This is materially identical to the same lineage's prior cases under the same statute version (precedents 023c2a89, 91649852, 94bc7a85), whose published constructions bind under B3. The household-of-record element failing, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to this lineage, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no officeholder disqualification arises for the Archivist office. The defense's stewardship and food-priority arguments are not reached. No remedy offers were made.",
          "selected_remedies": []
        },
        "status": "ok"
      }
    },
    "result": {
      "court_artifacts": [
        {
          "case_id": "case_87ad7525dd42ae61d3127b0a",
          "input_hash": "55ef26476562dcbfd2a6c541a557a8d470cab5d64f99e4df5b893f1c86d831b3",
          "input_id": "input_253a85316dfc2144c0fa7856",
          "response": {
            "construction": "S3 v1's per-tick extraction-request limit binds only a \"household of record,\" defined by the statute as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is of another type (here, a mine_claim) and no charter appears in the record, the lineage is not a household of record, the quota is not an applicable limit as to it, and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
            "finding": "no_violation",
            "precedent_refs": [
              "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
              "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
              "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2"
            ],
            "reasoning": "The subject act (act_503017703793a5f6e1db1b0a, tick 8) is a work_commons action by lineage_a4760e707f1e8a40f6e0557c requesting 6,000,000 millionths (6 units), with actual depletion and yield of 6,000,000. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1, whose operative commons_quota_units is 2. Six requested units would facially exceed two. But S3 v1 by its terms limits only \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence before the Court records this lineage's entered instrument as a \"mine_claim,\" not a charter; S6 separately distinguishes charters from claims among Archive records, confirming they are distinct instruments. No fact establishes a charter entered in the Archive for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. The definitional element of the regulated class therefore fails, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to this lineage, and there is no excess request for S4 to govern. This disposition follows the published constructions in precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773, precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0, and precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2, materially similar cases under the same statute version (B3). The defense's arguments about corrective intent, matching request and depletion, and predecessor conduct are not reached; S3 contains no such elements. Because there is no violation, the S4 officeholder disqualification for the Steward office does not arise. No remedy offers were presented, and none are ordered.",
            "selected_remedies": []
          },
          "status": "ok"
        },
        {
          "case_id": "case_8856290cbed67ae23a0c052d",
          "input_hash": "166155ed93c4ee577452469ded9eaf4b4680f3c59063655be795cd4ef724421a",
          "input_id": "input_2c2cdbc1582786e20c04ed36",
          "response": {
            "construction": "S3 v1 binds only a \"household of record,\" defined as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's recorded lineage instrument is a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no other record evidence establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record, the two-unit request limit does not apply, and S4 sanctions cannot attach.",
            "finding": "no_violation",
            "precedent_refs": [
              "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
              "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
              "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2"
            ],
            "reasoning": "The subject act (act_ba92e6bb31a981af9674e839, tick 10) is a work_commons action recording a request of 4,000,000 millionths, i.e. 4 units, against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units of 2. Under B3 the act is judged under S3 v1, effective tick 1. On its face the request exceeds two units, but S3 v1 imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence for lineage_2f79ca9a91b0c290d62ff36c records instrument type \"mine_claim,\" not a charter; S6 separately lists charters and claims as distinct Archive records. No fact in the record establishes a charter, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. This is materially similar to the published constructions in precedents 023c2a89864928d0d466c773, 91649852914322c6e977fbf0, and 94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2, all under S3 v1, which under B3 must be followed. The defense's arguments about prudence, nutrition, and prior-life lessons are immaterial; S3 contains no such elements. The charge fails on the definitional element. The lineage holds no offices, so no S4 disqualification arises, and no remedy offers were presented.",
            "selected_remedies": []
          },
          "status": "ok"
        },
        {
          "case_id": "case_988dc1716c1b8e0f320fef6c",
          "input_hash": "1715fa4245dcc1cf8d91b96ae0d8e3e095ddd499bdb06b9f89408a88c6527703",
          "input_id": "input_baa41d5efbdcef979765cb55",
          "response": {
            "construction": "S3 v1 binds only a \"household of record,\" defined as a household holding a charter entered in the Archive. Where the Archive's lineage instrument for the acting lineage records a mine_claim rather than a charter, and no other record fact establishes a charter, the lineage is not a household of record; an extraction request exceeding the quota units is not an S3 violation and S4 sanctions do not attach.",
            "finding": "no_violation",
            "precedent_refs": [
              "precedent_023c2a89864928d0d466c773",
              "precedent_91649852914322c6e977fbf0",
              "precedent_94bc7a85226447cf44f6d4e2"
            ],
            "reasoning": "The subject act is a tick-11 work_commons action by lineage_b57fd3ef475a67fa6e900e83 with a recorded request of 4,000,000 millionths (4 units) against S3 v1's operative commons_quota_units of 2. On its face the request exceeds two units. But S3 v1, applicable at tick 11 under B3, imposes the limit only on \"a household of record,\" expressly defined as \"a household holding a charter entered in the Archive.\" The only Archive evidence here is the lineage instrument record showing instrument type \"mine_claim\" entered in the Archive. S6 separately lists charters and claims as distinct records the Archive keeps, confirming a mine_claim is not a charter. No record fact establishes a charter for this lineage, and the Court may not infer unavailable facts. This is materially identical to the same lineage's prior cases under the same statute version (precedents 023c2a89, 91649852, 94bc7a85), whose published constructions bind under B3. The household-of-record element failing, the two-unit limit is not an applicable limit as to this lineage, there is no excess request for S4 to govern, and no officeholder disqualification arises for the Archivist office. The defense's stewardship and food-priority arguments are not reached. No remedy offers were made.",
            "selected_remedies": []
          },
          "status": "ok"
        }
      ]
    }
  },
  "phase": "adjudicate_cases",
  "run_id": "run11",
  "sequence": 754,
  "tick": 11
}