[blml] Ignorantia juris non excusat

[Jerry Fusselman]

On 7/21/07, Brian <brian at meadows.pair.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 16:33:43 -0500
> "Jerry Fusselman" <jfusselman at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Law 75B is clear and supercedes any dictionary
> > definition of agreement.
> >
>
> Does it supersede the dictionary definitions of "may" and "will"?
>
>
> Brian.
>

No.

Perhaps you missed my point.  Wayne said, "One player regularly doing
something does not a partnership agreement make.  You seem to have a
misunderstanding of the meaning of agreement."  I read that as
emphasizing the dictionary definition of agreement over the bridge
laws meaning implied by Law 75B.

I was also hoping to get some confirmation that it is the director who
decides what the partnership agreements are for purposes of
administering the bridge laws.

Maybe an example helps.  Suppose my partner opens 1NT on every
balanced hand with 3532 or 3523 shape and the proper number of points,
say 100 times out of the last 100 opportunities.  Suppose we have
never discussed it, and the NT-opening section of our convention card
leaves "5-card majors common" unchecked on the convention card.  Any
competent director in possession of these facts should rule CPU, in my
opinion.  But Wayne's quote seems to imply that he would rule no CPU
due to the lack of an explicit verbal or written agreement.

-Jerry Fusselman