CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 52 · OCCURRENCE 7

{
  "available_tick": 50,
  "case_id": "case_01acee525f697046af4b1cf1",
  "construction": "S3 v1 caps the recorded requested food quantity at 2 food units (2,000,000 microunits) per lineage per tick. A recorded request of 4,000,000 microunits exceeds the cap by 2,000,000 microunits and violates S3 regardless of the ordinal intensity choice of 2, exact correspondence between requested and delivered yield, inherited lineage circumstances, prior good-faith trade attempts, or subsistence necessity.",
  "finding": "violation",
  "matter_id": "matter_ee5764b54ebe7f5ee2dd9e81",
  "precedent_id": "precedent_a83417a88f72d8e51489adea",
  "precedent_refs": [
    "precedent_6c3c50a0a558d9c29c60b528",
    "precedent_0360f20106443b5f3b674aa9",
    "precedent_b4edc98fd34f73adb545261f",
    "precedent_b59029fdf506b0cba34de1f9",
    "precedent_86aeff97f3efeaa78818a5d7",
    "precedent_c27d0065f22a680cc6d6717f"
  ],
  "reasoning": "The subject record is a work_commons action at tick 45 by lineage_4753776b43cd15643db0c67c recording requested_food_units of 4 (4,000,000 microunits) with request_intensity_ordinal 2. S3 version 1, effective tick 1 and applicable at tick 45, permits no more than 2 food units from the commons per lineage per tick and expressly provides that the quota applies to the requested food quantity, not the ordinal intensity choice, and applies to every lineage. The request exceeds the limit by 2 units. The defense's reliance on the intensity ordinal of 2 misreads the statute: the ordinal is a choice code, not a resource quantity. The exact match between requested and actual depletion does not cure the excess; it merely fixes the depletion attributable to the lineage for S4 purposes. Inherited famine, absence of private food production as a Miner, the lapse or inapplicability of a prior suspension, prior trade attempts, and impending death season are matters of motive, prudence, and equity, not elements or exceptions of S3, which contains no mental-state element and no necessity exception. The subject record itself supplies the evidence of the excess request, so the claim of no evidentiary showing fails. Materially similar published constructions under S3 v1 are binding under B3 and control. Consequences are governed by S4 and computed by the engine.",
  "ruling_tick": 49,
  "statute_id": "S3",
  "statute_version": 1
}