On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 22:44, Ed Murphy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I change all sitting players to standing.
Detail: http://zenith.homelinux.net/cotc/viewcase.php?cfj=2216
== CFJ 2216 ==
If only Murphy had been given the password referenced in the
Russian Roulette contract and a reasonable amount of time to
review the section of the contract encrypted using that
password, then the AFO would be bound by that contract.
== CFJ 2217 ==
If only comex had been given the password referenced in the
Russian Roulette contract and a reasonable amount of time to
review the section of the contract encrypted using that
password, then the AFO would be bound by that contract.
I judge both of these FALSE. It is difficult to determine who the mind
of a partnership is for the purposes of R101 review rights. But, in
effect, agreements of the partnerships are extensions of the
partnership contract for those onto whom the partnership devolves
(that is, requires to cause the partnership to act to fulfill) the
obligations of such agreements. The AFO contract devolves all
obligations of any agreement to which it is bound onto all of its
parties; and theoretically any of them could be found GUILTY for
failing to cause the AFO to fulfill these obligations. Thus, given a
partnership structured as the AFO is, any agreement cannot
successfully impose obligations on the AFO until all partners have had
a reasonable opportunity to review that agreement.
-woggle
