============================== CFJ 2297 ==============================
The office of Notary has at least one Vote Point.
Called by omd: 04 Dec 2008 02:31:15 GMT
Assigned to Wooble: 07 Dec 2008 05:13:55 GMT
Judged TRUE by Wooble: 07 Dec 2008 21:51:31 GMT
See CFJs 2247 and 1992. If the office is not an entity
then the transfer failed.
On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 9:23 PM, comex wrote:
> On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 8:53 PM, Ian Kelly wrote:
>> See CFJs 1366 and 1369 (and a multitude of others around the same
>> time) for the precedents on this. The property rules have changed
>> greatly since then, but I would expect the same results today.
> I transfer 1 VP to CFJ 1366.
I transfer 1 VP to the office of Notary (not the holder of that office).
Judge Wooble's Arguments:
I judge TRUE. The Vote Market agreement, the backing document of Vote
Points, does not restrict ownership of Vote Points to any particular
class of entity, thus by R2166 VP CAN be transferred to any entity at
all. Both the precedent of CFJ 1992 and the usage of "entity" in
R2162 (where switches are defined such that they must specify a type
of entity that can possess them) combined with R2217 where at least
one office switch is defined, show that an office must be an entity.
At the time of the transfer, from what I can ascertain from the VM
report, comex did own a Vote Point that e could transfer. As no
barrier to transfer existed, the transfer succeeded.