Successors and assigns: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Quoth [http://www.adamsdrafting.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Advocate-Successors-Assigns-June-July-2013.pdf Ken Adams] “But a simpler explanation is that it’s a use...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|plainenglish|}}[http://www.adamsdrafting.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Advocate-Successors-Assigns-June-July-2013.pdf Quoth] the redoubtable [[Ken Adams]]: | |||
“But a simpler explanation is that it’s a useless provision that survives because drafters are unsure what function it serves and so are loath to get rid of it. And it’s sufficiently obscure that one can project onto it all sorts of unlikely meanings.” | “But a simpler explanation is that it’s a useless provision that survives because drafters are unsure what function it serves and so are loath to get rid of it. And it’s sufficiently obscure that one can project onto it all sorts of unlikely meanings.” | ||
Revision as of 10:47, 15 June 2021
|
Towards more picturesque speech™
|
Quoth the redoubtable Ken Adams:
“But a simpler explanation is that it’s a useless provision that survives because drafters are unsure what function it serves and so are loath to get rid of it. And it’s sufficiently obscure that one can project onto it all sorts of unlikely meanings.”