📄 Extracted Text (1,772 words)
From: jeffrey E. <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 6:11 PM
To: Noam Chomsky
Subject: Re: Marital Trust
Ok
On Mon, Ma= 21, 2018 at 8:09 PM Noam Chomsky wrote:
I'd like to hold off on th=s for a bit. I'm curious to learn more about Harry's thinkin=.
I'd like to write to him saying that there's n=thing in Mass law that prevents beneficiaries from doing as I
suggested.=C240 He can relieve his concerns about future fiduciary responsibility by=resigning, and we can return to the
situation before I appointed him trust=e, when I was trustee and had no concerns about fiduciary responsibility.=C2* If
he feels that he has carried out past actions that make him liabl= to some legal process, he should arrange with his
lawyer about ways to pr=tect himself. I would also like to ask him more directly than before=what he thinks would be a
proper division.
Then we can go on=from there.
OK?
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 2:03 AM, jeffrey E. <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]»
wrote:
Rich Kahn can talk wi=h Harry if ok with u
On Mon, May 21, 201= at 10:13 AM jeffrey E. <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]» wrote:
All silly, they can makes final dis=ribution of 2 million dollars and you and Valeria release all.
Max Harry c=ildren and you receive releases - easy
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 6:46 AM Noam Chomsky rote:
the latest.
=br>
Mass law prevents beneficiaries to divide up a trust and liq=idate it?
Forwarded message
EFTA_R1_01902161
EFTA02656436
From: Harry Chomsky
&=t;
It sounds like you would like me to say yes or no to your propos=l exactly as you have
stated it, without further discussion. I can&#=9;t do that. Here are some reasons:
1. It's not permitte= under Massachusetts trust law. I agreed to certain obligations
when=l became trustee, and I have to make sure to discharge them faithfully.4)=A0 Even if you tell me you don't care
about my fiduciary responsibilit=, the law says I'm responsible anyway.
2. It's not specif=c. For instance, you mention dividing the trust into two parts, but
=ou don't say what each part would consist of.
3. It's not=complete. For instance, you haven't proposed any way to shield u= and
Max from liability for past actions.
It might be possibl= to work out all of these problems and develop a legal, specific and
compl=te agreement based on the framework you've proposed. Would you l=ke to engage with me in some kind of
process to attempt that? Other =han having your lawyer talk to mine, do you have any suggestion about how =o do so?
n Sat, May 19, 2018 at 2:26 PM, Noam Chomsky
> wrote:
I'm g=ad that you find the idea interesting and think that you might consider it=
though you have to consult lawyers first.
My own view is d=fferent. To me the proposal I suggested seems to be a very
simple wa= of settling this matter, which to me is extremely troubling. I real=ze that this is just another case of a
longstanding difference in the way =e approach these problems, a difference that has been clear ever since we =ere
discussing the interest on the loan from the Trust and found that we c=uld not communicate because I mistakenly
assumed that it was a discussion =mong family members while your letters made it very clear and explicit tha= you saw
it as a legal issue to be settled among lawyers and Bainco, perha=s with a mediator in the adversary proceeding. All
matters I find it=very hard to comprehend, and to live with, but so be it.
=div style="colorrgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-
size:12.8px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:norm=l;font-weight:400;letter-
spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;t=xt-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;background-
color:rgb=255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial">=0 by all means consult with your
lawyer, or perhaps a battery of lawyers, =o make sure that your interests are properly protected. I don't =eed any
lawyer's advice. The matter is perfectly clear and strai=htforward. So there is no reason for me to hire a lawyer to deal
wit= the question and to have a lawyer contact yours and initiate a discussion=in which we all participate.
The matter is very simple.Q=A0 We can proceed without delay if you agree to
settle the issue in the si=ple manner that I suggested.
2
EFTA_R1_01902162
EFTA02656437
As for your proposals in your =etter of March 29, as I wrote you, the letter was
so shocking that it was =ard for me to bring myself to respond, but I did, in detail, but decided n=t to send it. Perhaps I
should. Will think about it.
=/div>
As for your proposals, my response was the obvious one. rm=sorry for the
stress you had to endure, but your efforts were a waste of t=me for reasons I had already fully explained before you
undertook them.=A0 As I'm sure you recall, a few years ago, I requested tax payments f=om the marital trust when
my IRA was being rapidly depleted by my advisers=who were distributing half to family and using the other half to pay
manag=ment fees and taxes for the entire estate, so that to pay Alex's medic.' expenses and the expenses for Wellfleet I
had to withdraw excess funds w=th exorbitant taxes, all that before withdrawing even a cent to live on ag=in with
exorbitant taxes. Your response was to refuse the request un=ess I agreed to intrusive and insulting financial
investigations -- of a k=nd I never considered when providing funds to you for something you needed= I made it clear
and explicit at the time that I would not submit to=this procedure. Since your efforts and proposals simply repeat the
s=me procedure, they were a waste of time.
There were some th=ngs in your letter that were correct. You're right that
despite =hat has happened, I'm still a "wealthy man," with income wel= above the median, though lacking a pension and
accumulated property, not =t the level of my peers. Furthermore, I can supplement my income by =eaching large
undergraduate courses, something I'd never done and that=is not that common for people approaching 90, but
something that I enjoy.=C2. And you too are a wealthy man, for the same reasons: the reasons are=that I've worked
hard all my life, lived fairly simply (and live even =ore simply today), and was therefore able to put aside enough money
to ens=re that my children and grandchildren are very well cared for, indefinitel=.
But I again suggest that we put all of this a=ide, and deal quickly and simply with
what appears to be the one outstandi=g issue: dividing the Marital trust and then dissolving it, all very simpl=, needing
no lawyers, at least on my part.
0
On Fri, May 18, =018 at 1:44 PM, Harry Chomsk
wrote:
This is an interesting idea. We could c=nsider it further, but I would need the
advice of my lawyer — and = assume you would want your own lawyer's advice as well — to e=sure that any agreement
we reach is consistent with Massachusetts law and =atisfies the interests, needs, and obligations of everybody
involved...A0 Perhaps, as a next step, you could ask your lawyer to contact mine and =egin a discussion in which we all
participate.
l&=39;m also curious to hear your thoughts about the proposals I suggested
in=my message on March 29th.
On Thu, May 17, =018 at 10:05 AM, Noam Chomsky
ote:
As I wrote a little while ago, I did write a lo=g response to your last -- deeply
depressing -- letter, but decided not to=send it. I may return to that letter later but will keep to some fac=ual matters
that ought to be cleared up.
3
EFTA_R1_01902163
EFTA02656438
But now Is= writing just about one point, which seems to be the core of the
problem -= a problem, which, again, I don't understand. But let's put =hat aside, though I hope we can clear it up soon.
All of this is a=C24> painful cloud that I never would have imagined would darken my late =ears.
The core issue seems to be the marital trus=. I've explained how M and I
actually set it up with Eric, which=seemed to us just plain common sense. I've also explained Max -=;s different
interpretation. I've asked you for yours, but haven=ii393 heard it. But let's put that aside too, and just resolve t=e
matter, as can be done very simply -- with no need for lawyers to explai= the fiduciary responsibility of the trustee I
appointed years ago to repl=ce me, something I never paid any attention to before.
The simple solution is to divide the trust into two parts. One =art will go to you,
to use as you wish. One part will go to me, for =e to use without any investigations of my financial situation and other
su=h intrusions that I won't accept. Then the trust can simply be d=ssolved, and it is all over.
So I suggest that we=proceed this way, and end the whole matter -- at least,
whatever it is tha= I understand about what is of concern to you.
Dc=div>
=C240 please note
The informat=on contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-cli=nt privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only =or
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthoriz=d use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof =s strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
return e-mail o= by e-mail to [email protected] cmailto:[email protected]>
, and
destroy this communication and all copies =hereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
chiv>
=please note
The information contained in this communication is
=onfidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside kformation, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the=property of
JEE
Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
4
EFTA_R1_01902164
EFTA02656439
c=mmunication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlaw=ul. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us =mmediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected] <[email protected]> ,
and
destroy t=is communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. cop=right -all rights reserved
The informa=ion contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-cl=ent privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only=for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE
Unauthori=ed use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof=is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received thiscommunication in error, please notify us
immediately by
return e-mail =r by e-mail to [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> , and
destroy this communication and all copies=thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
<=div>
--000000000000399c9d056cbb3ab0-- conversation-id 5434 date-last-viewed 0 date-received
1526926274 flags 8590195717 gmail-label-ids 7 6 remote-id 822933
5
EFTA_R1_01902165
EFTA02656440
ℹ️ Document Details
SHA-256
9cfd79b3dcbdad082acc66f9c7736e7f8d16e09b51330b157c8a0c57947d357d
Bates Number
EFTA02656436
Dataset
DataSet-11
Document Type
document
Pages
5