On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 10:53 AM, comex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Kerim Aydin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I submit the following proposal, Partner Responsibility, AI-2: >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Amend Rule 2145 by appending the following text: >> >> If a judge finds a partnership guilty in a criminal proceedings, >> e may sentence one or more members of the partnership for the >> crime rather than the partnership itself. To be an appropriate >> sentence in this case, the judge SHOULD use the text of the >> partnership as a guide to the devolution of sentencing but >> is not bound to follow the text if it is unclear on the subject >> or would not adequately apply responsibility. >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Ew... why not just have TITE not apply to partnerships?
The best way to do that, in my opinion, is to say that partnerships must be pledges. Anybody can initiate an equity case regarding a pledge, and it's easy to amend the rules to require partnerships to be pledges, and to amend the partnerships to make them pledges. --Ivan Hope CXXVII
