Talk:Paradox of the Court
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
if Euathlus decided to take a public defender, rather than defend himself, there would be no paradox.
Being that they had a verbal agreement, with no witnesses. Euathlus doesn't owe anything. Although, if they had a signed contract, the court can not void a previously agreed contract. Therefore, Euathlus would have to pay regardless of winning or not winning. No paradox. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.158.61.143 (talk) 11:38, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
