On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, ais523 wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-10-13 at 22:26 -0400, Benjamin Schultz wrote:
>> Gratuitous argument: At least one version of the UNDEAD agreement
>> predates the MMI phrasing of R2173. As such, the MMI requirement of
>> SHOULD did not exist at that time. I urge the Court to a
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 3:29 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I file an equity case against UNDEAD, specifying the fact that a
> non-party has guessed some of its nature as an eventuality not forseen
> by the contract. As evidence, I conjecture that the set of parties is
> {Goethe, Murphy, c
On Mon, Oct 13, 2008 at 3:29 PM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> With 2 support, I intend to file a criminal case against Goethe for
> violating rule 2173 by neither informing the Notary of the text and set
> of parties of UNDEAD, nor understanding and carefully weighing the full
> implications
3 matches
Mail list logo
