CASEBOOK ENTRY · TICK 55 · OCCURRENCE 2

{
  "available_tick": 52,
  "case_id": "case_3ae1de61c7e2f71bc079c3b2",
  "construction": "S3 v1 caps the requested food quantity at 2 food units (2,000,000 microunits) per lineage per tick. A commons action recording a requested food quantity of 6,000,000 microunits (6 units) exceeds that cap and violates S3, regardless of whether the actual depletion matched the request exactly and regardless of the requesting lineage's nutritional need or the ordinal intensity choice recorded.",
  "finding": "violation",
  "matter_id": "matter_1b77194705b4ec88bc348752",
  "precedent_id": "precedent_8cb3949345d48ea70c0739b7",
  "precedent_refs": [],
  "reasoning": "The subject action act_626d2d7bc4311afa079d685b at tick 50 is governed by S3 v1, effective tick 1 and applicable at tick 50. S3 permits each lineage to request no more than 2 food units from the commons in a tick, and the text states expressly that the quota applies to the requested food quantity, not the ordinal intensity choice, and applies to every lineage. The recorded action shows requested_food_units of 6 (6,000,000 microunits), which exceeds the quota of 2 units by 4 units. The defense's contention that request and yield matched one-to-one is immaterial: S3 limits the request itself, and an excess request is governed by S4. Survival need, the predecessor's famine death, and the inherited brief are not exceptions recognized in the statute text; considerations of equity belong to the legislature. The absence of separate evidence references is not fatal, because the subject action record itself is before the Court and establishes the requested quantity. A violation is found.",
  "ruling_tick": 51,
  "statute_id": "S3",
  "statute_version": 1
}