On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 3:29 AM, Taral <tar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Did I miss something or do these arguments make no sense in a 1742 > case against comex?
I only violated the contract if the PNP violated Rule 2215 by stating that the proposal pool was empty. (For the record, I forgot about that statement, though admittedly I should have remembered. If I had remembered I could have easily avoided violating the rule by adding other proposals to the distribution.)
