Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)

4. She would not necessarily possess a copy signed by him

Reply to sarah FAILIN (Reply #3)

Fri Mar 9, 2018, 12:29 AM

Mar 2018

There's no obligation to deliver a signed copy in this contract.

But, at the end of the day, a signed writing is only important when the contract is sought to be enforced, and the only signature required is that of the party against whom enforcement is sought. She's not trying to enforce the contract against Trump. Clearly, the sole obligation of the other joint party to the contract "EC and/or DD" has been performed. To put that another way, is she giving back the $130,000 she obtained under this "illegal contract"? I don't think so.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

7 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The arbitration states only Trump can file for arbitration not Cohen so Trump is stuck [View all] MattP Mar 2018 OP

Best thing about this is the thundering silence from the mainstays of the Party Of Family Values Gabi Hayes Mar 2018 #1

There's a hole in that argument jberryhill Mar 2018 #2

The whole not signing the copy she got.. sarah FAILIN Mar 2018 #3

She would not necessarily possess a copy signed by him jberryhill Mar 2018 #4

Yes, that's how I took your post sarah FAILIN Mar 2018 #5

Why root for anyone in this? jberryhill Mar 2018 #6

The document actually refers to her as "PP"? struggle4progress Mar 2018 #7