| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
 Posted - 30 Mar 2005 : 21:56:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
I do not know the term Warehouse Reciept but it sounds like a Bill of Lading......
.....I do not know the answer to your question Marty.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
The following definitions are from a book co-authored by Ronald A. Anderson, Professor of Law and Government, Drexel University (he is also the author of Anderson on the Uniform Commericial Code) and Walter A. Kumpf, Editor in Chief, Emeritus, South Western Publishing Co.quote:
from Business Law - Principal and Cases by Anderson/Kumpf...
Warehouse Receipt: a receipt issued by the warehouseman for goods stored with him.
Regulated by the Uniform Commercial Code, which clothes the receipt with some degree of negotiability.
Warehouseman: a person regularly engaged in the business of storing the goods of others for compensation.
If he holds himself out to serve the public without discrimination, he is a public warehouseman.
Bill of Lading: a document issued by a carrier reciting the receipt of goods and the terms of the contract of transportation. Regulated by the federal Bills of Lading Act or the uniform Commercial Code.
By these definitions, it is apparent that the Warehouse Receipt is a document that is separate and distinct from a Bill of Lading.
The documents are issued by different "players" for different reasons and have separate functions in the "commerce game".
|
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 31 Mar 2005 09:53:13 |
 |
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 31 Mar 2005 : 10:09:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
I do not know the term Warehouse Reciept but it sounds like a Bill of Lading......
.....I do not know the answer to your question Marty.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
The following definitions are from a book co-authored by Ronald A. Anderson, Professor of Law and Government, Drexel University (he is also the author of Anderson on the Uniform Commericial Code) and Walter A. Kumpf, Editor in Chief, Emeritus, South Western Publishing Co.quote:
from Business Law - Principal and Cases by Anderson/Kumpf...
Warehouse Receipt: a receipt issued by the warehouseman for goods stored with him.
Regulated by the Uniform Commercial Code, which clothes the receipt with some degree of negotiability.
Warehouseman: a person regularly engaged in the business of storing the goods of others for compensation.
If he holds himself out to serve the public without discrimination, he is a public warehouseman.
In the book entitled Honest Money -Biblical Principles of Money and Banking the author explains warehouse receipts in the following manner:quote:
From the book Honest Money....
Honest Paper Money: Coins and ingots are heavy and bulky. It should be obvious why people prefer paper money. It fits into a wallet or purse. It's flat. It's easily recognizable. Paper can be printed to represent any number of currency units: 1, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, and so forth.
The key word is "represent". The paper money, to remain honest, must be isued by the money-issuer on a strict one-to-one basis. If it announces that it represents a one-ounce gold coin, .999 pure, then the issuer muct have that one-ounce coin in reserve, ready to be redeemed by anyone who walks in and presents the piece of paper.
To issue a piece of paper that serves as an IOU for precious metals without having 100% of the promised metal in reserve is fraudulent, It is theft. It is a form of tampering with weights and measures.
How would such a system work? The coin owner might deposit the coins at a warehouse. He wants his coins kept safely. He pays a fee for the safekeeping,.... The warehouse issues a receipt. Since the receipt promises to pay the bearer a specific amount of coins, or ingots, on demand, the paper circulates as if it were gold, assuming that everyone knows and trusts the warehouse that issued the receipt.
Warning: whenever someone promises to store your precious metals for free, watch out! You never get something for nothing. Either there is a hidden payment, or else there is fraud. Any system of paper money or credit that doesn't involve a fee for storage is unquestionably and inevitably fraudulent. Keep looking until you identify the form of fraud.
We have some "one dollar bills" that look like a Federal Reserve Note at first glance, but at the top they say "Silver Certificate".
It is our understanding that the "Silver Certificates" were true warehouse receipts.
The fact that we can no longer take the "Silver Certificates" to a specific location and exchange them for a designated amount of actual silver metal indicates one of two possible scenerios:
....... 1. The warehouseman has committed fraud.
....... 2. The silver has been stolen from the warehouseman
Best Regards,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 01 Apr 2005 11:03:43 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 31 Mar 2005 : 14:56:42
|
I tried to explain it in terms of the bill of exchange extant on the foreign exchange market but you called that unresponsive before I finished the Post. But you have me a little curious about the warehouse receipt for the gold in Fort Knox, now in the vaults of the Federal Reserve Bank. What was that? Die Hard II when Bruce Willis thwarted a theft there.
The vault is composed of a colored tile scheme and these warehouse receipts are actually tracked by moving pallets of gold from one color to another as transactions between nations occur. This is the "central bank" in the video clip.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Checks_are_Islamic.wmv
I am sure they (UN organs IMF and IBRD/World Bank) would have left a receipt with the United States Treasury in Fort Knox. That is what it says on the face of every FRN. Look at the contract between Rosaria Marin and John Snow. That could be the warehouse receipt but on debt, not gold or silver.
I think you are failing to integrate fractional reserve banking into your scenario Marty. Or to justify usury and exemptions (Deuteronomy 23:20 and 15:1-3) for the stranger (foreigner - nakar^). Most important though you neglect the conversion from gold as a fixed exchange rate stabilizer to the SDR - Special Drawing Right http://www.investorwords.com/5779/SDR.html
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/SeizeGold.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Leroy_on_bills.wmv [3:49 minute mark] (I recognize my voice asking "The third means of Removal for Cause?")
The Jamaica/Rambouillet Accord is erroneously considered the bible of conspiracy theory. When I first heard about it, I was told if I ever laid eyes on it I would be killed. But there it was in the State Department Bulletin in the federal repository since late 1975.
So consider that the Federal Reserve would like to keep you abreast, sometimes even reading the speeches hours before they are actually given. They are all in plain English for high school level (or so) audiences.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2005/default.htm
I think your logic to redact the scenario to the two choices given above is erroneous. I was getting to a layman's explanation of why when you cut me off for being 'unresponsive'.
Consider the 1:20-1:40 minute mark carefully in the snippet. "God gave you the character." The paranoia ensues after losing your character. You will be slapped down by a myriad of false confirmations. At the moment your character is assassinated, that is time for libel of review. The libel and slander initiates the judicial action (in admiralty) by counterclaim*. A libel invokes admiralty jurisdiction. [2:58 minute mark - "Setoff... Counterclaim".
This just rang into my email box Marty. But I think it may be for you:
Speech by Governor Susan Schmidt Bies
Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, Bank Secrecy Act, and Capital Issues
http://www.federalreserve.gov/boarddocs/speeches/2005/20050331/default.htm
http://www.bis.org/bcbs/cp3full.pdf
Basel Capital Accord
This is amusing. Since FRNs are limited liability notes is not the FDIC insuring insurance?
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_FDIC.jpg
Regards,
David Merrill.
^ "feign self to be another" colorable names, colorable title, colorable money upon warehouse receipt, colorable law...
That is the function of the bill of exchange Marty. To extract material wealth and energy out from under the penumbra of represented (colorable/attorned) assets.
* When I stood accused all I would say is, "No man can be compelled to incriminate himself." I retained my original character.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/abatement.gif
Abatement for misnomer link
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/judgment.jpg
Judgment Image link
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/affidavit2.jpg
Abatement for misnomer
When they would try imposing a legal name upon me I would say, "I gave the arresting officer my true name. If you have lost track of the paperwork, do not expect me to rebuild it for you." (No man can be compelled to incriminate himself.) They could not see at all that the legal name, acceptance of it was character assassination.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 01 Apr 2005 07:57:02 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 01 Apr 2005 : 09:13:34
|
The purpose of this post is to pose two questions to nail down exactly what the Bill of Exchange (BOE) is.
The following definition is from a book co-authored by Ronald A. Anderson, Professor of Law and Government, Drexel University (he is also the author of Anderson on the Uniform Commericial Code) and Walter A. Kumpf, Editor in Chief, Emeritus, South Western Publishing Co.
quote:
Acoording to Anderson/Kumpf in the book [u]Business Law -Principles and Cases .....
Bill of Exchange (draft):
an unconditional order in writing
by one person upon another,
signed by the person giving it,
and ordering the person to whom it is directed
to pay on demand or at a definite time
a sum certain
in money
to order or bearer.
The following are exerpts from some of the posts above.
We have tried to include only the portion of those posts containing specific references to the Bill of Exchange and what its function is.
We have attempted to push all other information aside for the time being.
With your permission, we are suggesting we use the following chronology:
1.Determine the answers to the questions below.
2.Then we would like to more forward and ask some questions concerning the many other interesting topics you have alluded to in the posts above.
We realize that we are moving quite slowly here and appreciate your patience in bearing with us.
We perceive that it is important to clearly define the basic definitions for ourselves and other readers so that we have a solid foundation to build on as we discuss these topics.quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill....
What is the definition of “Bill of Exchange”?
Carrol Quigley explains the history of bills of exchange in Tragedy and Hope; A History of the World in Our Time.
Getting from say, Turkey to Cyprus was a fairly risky task. Ships sunk and pirates plundered etc.
So break down international trade into four components. The seller's product. The seller's gold coin. The buyer's product. The buyer's gold coin.
Now eliminate the need to figure 'buyer' and 'seller'. Nation 1 and Nation 2.
If Nation 1 has a ship full of goods and gets it to Nation 2, does it make sense to sail the ship back to Nation 1 empty except for the gold coin tendered by Nation 2? No.
So leave the gold coin there on credit in a bank and instead, carry Nation 2's goods back to Nation 1 in the hull.
In turn, do not carry Nation 2's gold coin back to them, risking that it will be lost or stolen in route.
Thus developed bills of exchange (on the foreign exchange market).
David Merrill then wrote....
I tried to explain it in terms of the bill of exchange extant on the foreign exchange market.....
..... That is the function of the bill of exchange Marty. To extract material wealth and energy out from under the penumbra of represented (colorable/attorned) assets.
Regards,
David Merrill.
Question A: Do you all agree that the definition of Bill of Exchange, given above by Anderson/Kumpf, is the correct definition?
Question B: By making a hypothetical extension of the scenerio Carroll Quigley describes above, will someone please demonstrate how the Bill of Exchange would be used in the Turkey/Cyprus….Nation 1/Nation 2 example?
Thank you for giving this your attention.
Best Regards,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 01 Apr 2005 10:09:18 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 01 Apr 2005 : 10:04:53
|
Question A: Do you all agree that the definition of Bill of Exchange, given above by Anderson/Kumpf, is a correct definition?
Answer A: Yes (I agree). I love its simplicity. The definition covers the bill of exchange I demanded honor on August 13, 2001. Judgment on dishonor cured thirty days later - September 11, 2001.
[Are we to wait for the Ecclesia to weigh-in before proceeding? Let anyone who disagrees with Anderson/Kumpf please speak up promptly.]
Question B: By making a hypothetical extension of the scenerio Carroll Quigley describes above, will someone please demonstrate how the Bill of Exchange would be used in the Turkey/Cyprus….Nation 1/Nation 2 example?
Answer B: Through a central banking agreement that expressed good faith and credit in both Turkey and Cyprus. Merchants could transport bills of exchange home instead of having to carry gold and silver coin. They could collect coin out of the central bank by cashing the check at home.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Checks_are_Islamic.wmv |
Edited by - David Merrill on 01 Apr 2005 15:55:49 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 01 Apr 2005 : 10:27:17
|
David,
Thank you for the prompt and concise reply to our questions posed above.quote:
David Merrill wrote:
[Are we to wait for the Ecclesia to weigh-in before proceeding? Let anyone who disagrees please speak up promptly.]
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
In our opinion, it is not necessary to wait. We would, however, encourage anyone who has comments or disagrees to express their opinions.
When they comment or disagree, we can then back up and deal with the issues raised, at that time, before again proceeding.
Best Regards,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 01 Apr 2005 18:00:34 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 01 Apr 2005 : 21:18:25
|
quote:
David Merrill wrote:
The bill is cured waiver of tort.
Simply speaking now I place good faith in the original estate.
I no longer have a bank account or sign indorsement on debt instruments (checks for FRNs).
Thirty days is the cure time in law for such notice - see Daniel Chapter 6. So the bill cured from August 13 to September 11, 2001.
[Finally someone got curious enough to ask!]
This is a question Cornerstone Foundation then asked:
What did David Merrill mean when he said “the bill [of exchange] is cured waiver of tort”?quote:
David Merrill Merrill replied:
Waiver of tort is like saying, "Instead of the jail time or lashings or whatever required by law as a criminal punishment, I am billing you $5000."
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
It seems that the next word that needs to be defined is “Tort”.
In his book entitled Adventures In Legal Land the author…quote:
Marc Stevens states….….a tort is defined by lawyers as:
tort…
A wrong independent of contract…
A breach of duty which the law, as distinguished from a mere contract, has imposed.
An injury or wrong committed either with or without force,
to the person or property of another.
Ballentine’s Law Dictionary, (emphasis by Stevens).
Marc Stevens goes on to say.... A ”tort” consists of two
elements:
.......1. the breach of a duty
.......2. damage
Here, the duty is not created by a contract or an agreement. It’s allegedly created by the so called “law.”
The following definition is from a book co-authored by Ronald A. Anderson, Professor of Law and Government, Drexel University (he is also the author of Anderson on the Uniform Commericial Code) and Walter A. Kumpf, Editor in Chief, Emeritus, South Western Publishing Co.quote:
According to Anderson/Kumpf in the book Business Law -Principles and Cases .....
tort is....
a private injury or wrong arising from a breach of a duty created by law.
Question A: Does everyone agree with the definitions of “tort” given above?
Best Regards,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 01 Apr 2005 21:30:11 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 02 Apr 2005 : 09:09:53
|
In context of the bill of exchange, there is a presumption of social compact - a general contract that I must obey the (non)law. There are no enacting clauses on the Colorado Revised Statutes and according to Article V, Section 18 Enacting clause., not a single one of those "statutes" is a statute.
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/BOE1.gif
Bill of Exchange Image 1
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/BOE2.gif
Bill of Exchange Image 2
Notice that the memorandum begins:
quote:
This bona fide tort may be used for certificate of exigent circumstances and open qui tam adoption...
Sure! It took some audacity to write the bill for all the 'money' in the world. Upon careful consideration I understand we may be expected to call on government to come through with promises made, to apply pressure for government to perform up to obligations made - even if that is the Throne Room of God. I have even thrown rocks into the sky demanding of Him, "You promised!"
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 02 Apr 2005 09:21:25 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 02 Apr 2005 : 11:45:22
|
David,
Do you agree that the definitions for "tort" supplied by Marc Stevens, Ronald A. Anderson, and Walter A. Kumpf in the post above are correct definitions of the word "tort"?
Respectfully Submitted
Marty |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 02 Apr 2005 : 11:50:19
|
The following definition is from a book co-authored by Ronald A. Anderson, Professor of Law and Government, Drexel University (he is also the author of Anderson on the Uniform Commericial Code) and Walter A. Kumpf, Editor in Chief, Emeritus, South Western Publishing Co.quote:
According to Anderson/Kumpf in the book Business Law -Principles and Cases .....
waiver is....
the release or relinquishment of a known right or objection.
Question: Does everyone agree with the definition given for "waiver" above?
Best Regards,
Marty |
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 03 Apr 2005 10:44:03 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 02 Apr 2005 : 17:21:38
|
This is easier than to recreate the definition:
quote:
From Black's Law Dictionary - Fifth Edition p. 816
Waiver of tort. The election, by an injured party, for purposes of redress, to treat the facts as establishing an implied contract, which he may enforce, instead of an injury by fraud or wrong, for the committing of which he may damand damages, compensatory or exemplary.
So I hope that clears that up a bit. The definition is right there in Black's.
Marty, hopefully you are curious about qui tam adoption.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 03 Apr 2005 11:25:59 |
|
|
|
Cornerstone Foundation
Advanced Member
uSA
254 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 10:35:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill....
I was hoping you would start picking apart qui tam adoption.
Cornertone Foundation wrote:
According to Black's Law Dictionary, Third Edition the definition of qui tam is....quote:
Qui Tam - Latin "Who as well ____."
An action brought by an informer,
under a statute which establishes a penalty for the commission or omission of a certain act,
and provides that the same shall be recoverable in a civil action,
part of the penalty to go to anyone who will bring such action
and the remainder to the state
or some other institution,
is called a "qui tam" action;
because the plaintiff states that he sues as well for the state as for himself.
See in re Barker, 56 Vt. 14; Grover v. Morris, 73 N. Y. 478.
|
Edited by - Cornerstone Foundation on 03 Apr 2005 10:41:23 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 11:06:26
|
First I wish to amplify:
quote:
Your next question asked insight into what one “David Merrill” meant when he apparently said:
“the bill [of exchange] is cured waiver of tort”.
Please understand that I hold no ill-will toward Charles for his slander. He is actually building my premise that the Christian Common Law is privatized law. It is just so prevalent in stature that many Christians can actually fall under the illusion there is authority in the idolatry of equating Jesus with God. The problem is that one will fall like Leroy Michael going down that road. Like I have said several times, the Comptroller Warrant* likely arrived in Ogden the day before SCHWEITZER and PETERSEN were taken into custody. I breached the close of the international bankers. That is why Leroy was so entertained when I properly (IMFIRS not IRS) named the parties on the Comptroller Warrant. What he did not expect is that I would deviate from the instructions to cite the UCC upon my endorsement.
So far as qui tam adoption. So as not to be determined "unresponsive" I will await your specific questions, and I hope they are based in the definition you have quoted from Black's 3rd.
Regards,
David Merrill.
* I am tempted sometimes to have the newpaper reporter who chronicled that trip to the Post Office dig into her records so I have some proof. However, she told me that (at the time) those articles about me were record-setting in popularity. I am figuring that she will hold follow-up interviews and articles payment for my request for copies of the Comptroller Warrant and her notes. Believe it or not, I like to lay low - "off the grid". My purposes here are transparent on the advanced-resonance Topic. http://ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=378&whichpage=1
Also: [*link omitted by Moderator] where Charles has apparently imported PMs into his site. It looks like he is publishing private messages. [I am not directing your attention there to "air" laundry, but to forewarn you about the mission of this forum. I have seen too many articulate debates end in summary expulsion from this website. Many Christians think because of the main theme here this forum should only allow Christians to write. Also keep in mind that PM means Private Message. While reading there understand it expounds and amplifies my points about the confines of Christian elitism. I believe it is new in fashion but old in form. Charles accuses Bondservant of being corrupt because he does not agree with the mission statement of ecclesia.org.] |
Edited by - David Merrill on 03 Apr 2005 18:31:24 |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 19:22:51
|
This is easier than to recreate the definition:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From Black's Law Dictionary - Fifth Edition p. 816
Waiver of tort. The election, by an injured party, for purposes of redress, to treat the facts as establishing an implied contract, which he may enforce, instead of an injury by fraud or wrong, for the committing of which he may damand damages, compensatory or exemplary.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
So David, can you give us an example of a waiver of Tort? This should be easy for you if you understand what it is.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 19:44:44
|
Dear Livefree;
quote:
So David, can you give us an example of a waiver of Tort? This should be easy for you if you understand what waiver of tort is.
Giving an example is independent of whether or not I understand what it is. An example is an example. Either I have one handy or not.
Werner Maximilian cured his counterclaim waiver of tort, bonding against the arrest of the United States of America corporation on March 14, 2001:
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/VernsTrueBill.gif
Vern's True Bill
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/Deadline.gif
The Deadline
www.ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/2XBondrule.gif
Rule for 2X Bonding
Werner Maximilian’s counterclaim
Next time you are in the library, check the newspapers to verify that $11t suddenly dissolved from the Stock Market.
My recollection of the thought process was waiver of tort on the national debt came to mind when we realized we could not just release one little parcel of land. The whole thing, the entire original estate (at least within the scope of these united States of America*) had to be claimed.
As demanded in the counterclaim, the President announced the release of the people (true name men and women) from the national debt obligations:
quote:
From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/05/20010502.html
Personal savings accounts will transform Social Security from a government IOU into personal property and real assets; property that workers will own in their own names and that they can pass along to their children. Ownership, independence, access to wealth should not be the privilege of a few. They're the hope of every American, and we must make them the foundation of Social Security.
Leroy Michael articulates the concept well in the snippet [1:30, 3:48 and 2:10 minute marks. Also see "foreigner" and "stranger" in the Bible at Deuteronomy 15:1-3 and 23:10].
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Leroy_on_bills.wmv
Regards,
David Merrill.
* Of course when I saw these waivers of tort functional, I executed the bill of exchange waiver of tort. That is the more obvious example. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 03 Apr 2005 20:39:01 |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 20:39:21
|
That is NOT explaining what a Waiver of Tort is. You obviously do not understand what a Waiver of Tort is.
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 20:52:36
|
You asked for an example.
If you want to know what a waiver of tort is, then read the law dictionary definition.
You make the presumption that it is my task-at-hand to either convince you or at least convince you that I know what I am talking about. Not. I think it is so much easier for you to just type out two sentences above than to go look up the articles in the archived newspapers.
My objective is to be as entertaining as possible while extracting the intelligence I desire about Internet congregations. I have advised you all to view my prolific writing here as nothing more than Internet yarn. The many of you who call my clerk for certified documentation and who verify my facts as stated, you deserve more. You know that the facts speak for the truth in itself. Good for you. This 13th Amendment is the only document repeatedly requested so that it is hanging in the cubicle.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_13th_Amendment_hanging_in_clerk's_office.jpg
One morning I came in to find the bill's proof of service already on the screen:
http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/onscreen.jpg
Out of millions of documents, go figure the odds.
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 03 Apr 2005 20:58:27 |
|
|
|
Livefree
Advanced Member
USA
270 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 21:07:18
|
You told me to look in the archive newspapers. I can hardly make out what those newspapers say. You obviously cannot explain what a waiver of tort is.
<<"If you want to know what a waiver of tort is, then read the law dictionary definition.">>
Yes, that is what you said before. Unless you have some schooling in law there is no way a layman reading that definition from the law dictionary would have any clue what they are talking about.
Again, if you REALLY KNEW what a waiver of tort is, you would have no problem explaining it, in layman's terms.
Read the definition again: What are they talking about?
Waiver of tort. The election, by an injured party, for purposes of redress, to treat the facts as establishing an implied contract, which he may enforce, instead of an injury by fraud or wrong, for the committing of which he may damand damages, compensatory or exemplary.
|
Edited by - Livefree on 03 Apr 2005 21:08:02 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 21:39:52
|
The archived newspapers are at your local library - to verify the event of March 14, 2001.
So far as the definition, those are layman's terms. If you have problems with the words, like "contract" or "exemplary" you may look them up in any dictionary.
You seem to want me to revise the dictionary definition:
quote:
You obviously cannot explain what a waiver of tort is.
I did that already. I presented the definition from Black's Law Dictionary. All I can do is paraphrase it. Or as you seem to want, to change it. That would be improper since I agree with the definition as found. Maybe Vern will give us the definition he has in an older law dictionary?
Since you are not making any sense to me understand that your accusation I do not know what I am talking about is inert.
|
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2005 : 23:14:33
|
There is an old term, "guilty as tort," which is a way of defining torture, torturous.
In the military art, a defense used by the ancients, formed by the troops arranging themselves in close order and placing their bucklers over their heads, making a cover resembling a tortoise-shell. |
Edited by - Manuel on 03 Apr 2005 23:19:20 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Schweitzer Video on Common Law
