On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Quazie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I cfj on the following statement "If an entity is not elgible to own a > particular type of asset, then they own zero of that asset" > > I argue true, though ehird seems to thing otherwise.
No need to CFJ on it, in my opinion. They own zero of an asset if and only if there are zero of that asset with them as their owner, which is true if and only if there are no assets with them as their owner. If they are not eligible to own that type of asset, there can be no assets with them as their owner. (Unless they're the Lost and Found Department or something.) Mind retracting this so it doesn't add to the judicial workload? --Ivan Hope CXXVII
