EFTA01055331.pdf

From: "jeffrey E." <[email protected]> To: Noam Chomsky Subject: Re: Marital Trust Date: Sat, 19 May 2018 12:32:29 +0000 there is nothing except the split and mutual releases from you on one side and the children on the other. I suggest you take 2 million and they take 500k plus the note On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 3:37 AM Noam Chomsky < > wrote: Just got this from Harry. I'm inclined to write a brief response saying that he can consult with lawyers ifhe likes, but I don't have to. There is no problem at all with the proposal. I might also add something about my response to his letter of March 29 and why I simply dismissed it. OK? -------- Forwarded message From: Harry Chomsky <harryfachomsky.net> Date: Fri, May 18, 2018 at 1:44 PM Subject: Re: Marital Trust To: Noam Chomsky Cc: Avi Chomsky <[email protected]>, Diana Chomsky <[email protected]> This is an interesting idea. We could consider it further, but I would need the advice of my lawyer — and I assume you would want your own lawyer's advice as well — to ensure that any agreement we reach is consistent with Massachusetts law and satisfies the interests, needs, and obligations of everybody involved. Perhaps, as a next step, you could ask your lawyer to contact mine and begin a discussion in which we all participate. I'm also curious to hear your thoughts about the proposals I suggested in my message on March 29th. On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Noam Chomsky < wrote: As I wrote a little while ago, I did write a long 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 factual matters that ought to be cleared up. But now I'm 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 that aside, though I hope we can clear it up soon. All of this is a painful cloud that I never would have imagined would darken my late years. The core issue seems to be the marital trust. 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't heard it. But let's put that aside too, and just resolve the matter, as can be done very simply -- with no need for lawyers to explain the fiduciary responsibility of the trustee I appointed years ago to replace me, something I never paid any attention to before. The simple solution is to divide the trust into two parts. One part will go to you, to use as you wish. One part will go to me, for me to use without any investigations of my financial situation and other such intrusions that I won't accept. Then the trust can simply be dissolved, and it is all over. So I suggest that we proceed this way, and end the whole matter -- at least, whatever it is that I understand about what is of concern to you. EFTA01055331  D please note The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may constitute inside information, and is intended only for the use of the addressee. It is the property of JEE Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail or by e-mail to [email protected], and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved EFTA01055332