The prehistoric plants example is one of the best examples since during the present they are nonexistent yet depending on the specimen can be both known or unknown. The copper mine is very much the same except that it qualifies as being in the future and not the past.
More Court Documentation:
http://www.harp.org/wheeler.txt
"..Not only is the resisting party (presumably the
patient) claiming lack of knowledge of the arbitration term, but he asks not to be prevented from litigating a consequential loss controversy that was also
unknown and nonexistent at the time of contracting. Viewed in this light, the knowledge factor is ....."
http://www.bakers-legal-pages.com/cc...ions/74185.htm
As Judge Miller explained in his concurring opinion in Ex parte Carillo, 687 S.W.2d 320, 325 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985):
Parole is very much a speculative proposition. Its happening is contingent on many factors
unknown and nonexistent at the time of a guilty plea.
There are hundreds of quotes using known and unknown with nonexistent.
And I have yet to see any proof showing I am wrong... besides opinions.
[ March 21, 2004, 18:48: Message edited by: NTJedi ]