On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ivan Hope wrote: > >> Rule 2191: "An equity case regarding a pledge CAN be initiated by a >> non-party, provided that all other requirements for initiating an >> equity case are met. The initiator of such a case is considered to be >> a party to the pledge for the purpose of that case." > > However, Rule 2169 requires clearly identifying the set of parties, so > I'm treating that case as ineffective.
Rule 2191 states that the initiator of a case is a party to the pledge for the purpose of that case. I don't believe the term "party" is actually defined anywhere in the rules, so 2191's explicit partial definition of a party takes precedence over the implicit understanding we have of what a party is. (Rule 754: "A term explicitly defined by the Rules by default has that meaning, as do its ordinary-language synonyms not explicitly defined by the rules." versus "Any term not addressed by previous provisions of this Rule by default has its ordinary-language meaning.") Therefore, my initiation of this case was successful. --Ivan Hope CXXVII
