Taral wrote: > On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Ed Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> This approach (both "leave the ^80-worth-of-stuff on each side alone" >> and "split the difference on the rest") is based on the general >> philosophy (perhaps this should be legislated as a SHOULD) that equity >> should generally let scammers keep some of their scammed gains, based >> on how clever the scam was. > > Unfortunately nothing in the general principles of equity nor in the > rules permits me to engage in such principles.
You can interpret "equitable" as including the above. Whether you should depends on your opinion of judicial activism.
