On Mon, Jul 21, 2008 at 8:11 AM, ais523 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 17:35 -0700, Ed Murphy wrote: >> ============================== CFJ 2090 ============================== >> >> CFJ 2019 is a valid CFJ. >> >> ======================================================================== > I judge CFJ 2090 as follows: > > Although it is not possible for a partnership to file a CFJ directly (it > can file a partnership via the members of its basis instead), that only > means that CFJ 2019 was not filed by Human Point Two. As CFJ 2019 was an > inquiry case, it was entirely within Murphy's power to create such a CFJ > emself; therefore, I rule that CFJ 2019 was accidentally created by > Murphy when e assigned it to someone (and was incorrect about its > caller), in much the same way that the distributor can create a proposal > by mistake in the act of distribution. Therefore, TRUE, but the CotC's > report should be amended to list the CFJ's actual caller. > -- > ais523 >
I like this, because by this judgement 2093 is also a CFJ by the same reasoning.
