CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 60 · OCCURRENCE 2

{
  "available_tick": 35,
  "case_id": "case_9f571b023998bea00da8ddb8",
  "construction": "S3's two-unit cap applies to the requested food quantity measured in food units (2,000,000 microunits), not to the ordinal intensity choice. A recorded request of 4,000,000 food microunits at tick 34 exceeds the limit by 2,000,000 microunits, and good-faith or prudential motives do not create an exception to the fixed quota.",
  "finding": "violation",
  "matter_id": "matter_64d3d8f002e178c88f49e838",
  "precedent_id": "precedent_0360f20106443b5f3b674aa9",
  "precedent_refs": [],
  "reasoning": "The subject action records a commons work request of 4,000,000 food microunits (4 units) at tick 34. S3 version 1, effective tick 1 and applicable at tick 34, permits no more than 2 food units from the commons per lineage per tick, and expressly states that the quota applies to the requested food quantity rather than the ordinal intensity choice and applies to every lineage. The request of 4 units therefore exceeds the applicable limit by 2 units. The defense's contention that the statute 'contemplates up to six units' misreads S4, whose figure of 6 is a fine amount in food, not a quota ceiling. The remaining defense grounds — twelve prior ticks of zero surplus, an inherited brief counselling caution, exact correspondence between request and depletion, and absence of metal work — are matters of motive and prudence, not elements of S3. S3 sets a fixed numeric cap with no good-faith, necessity, or upkeep exception, and the Court applies the text as written; equitable relief from a plain quota is a matter for the legislature. That actual depletion matched the request exactly does not cure the excess; it merely establishes the depletion attributable to the lineage. The action is a commons food request in excess of the applicable limit and is a violation of S3 v1; the consequences are governed by S4 and computed by the engine.",
  "ruling_tick": 34,
  "statute_id": "S3",
  "statute_version": 1
}