On Mon, 12 May 2008, comex wrote: > Since the dispute is purely between members of the contract, which > party is being treated better or worse than another?
"Common definitions" of equity don't have any meaning when we're speaking of a sole party. To have an agreement with only 1 person is nonsense in the first place, but a pledge allows such nonsense as a convenient legal fiction. It is no more absurd to exrapolate this legal fiction by deciding that the rules for "every" party reduce smoothly in cases where "every" = 1. Otherwise, if we were going by common definitions you cite, we'd have to conclude that equity with oneself on any level must be considered either tautology or nonsense and cases thrown out accordingly. -Goethe
