|
|
Enron Mail |
Sara, earlier this week, I asked Stephanie and Samantha to update lotus notes
on the brokerage agreements that we prioritized last week. In addition to lotus notes, I often send emails to the traders to keep them updated -- as the attached is an example. If you would like to be copied so that you know what's going on -- i.e., that I am working diligently on the brokerage agreemetns on a daily basis, let me know. I fgured that you did not want to be flooded with the emails and that, instead, we would meet every other week for an update. Let me know -- whatever makes you feel more comfortable is what I would like to do. Cheryl Nelson Senior Counsel EB3875 (713) 345-4693 ----- Forwarded by Cheryl Nelson/NA/Enron on 02/08/2001 03:42 PM ----- Cheryl Nelson Sent by: Cheryl Nelson 02/08/2001 10:38 AM To: aneela.charania@enron.com cc: Subject: Raymond James Brokerage Agreement Hey Aneela, here is the other email sent to Paul this week. As you can see from the attached, we are still in the process of discussing key issues with RJ, the agreeemtn is not yet in execution posture. In a phone call subsequent to the attached email, we resolved all of the issues identified below (in Enron's favor), except for the limitation of liability issue (see my previous email to you) that Paul and I are looking into. I just want to convey to you that this is a priority to us and we are working on it daily. Cheryl Nelson Senior Counsel EB3875 (713) 345-4693 ----- Forwarded by Cheryl Nelson/NA/Enron on 02/08/2001 10:35 AM ----- Cheryl Nelson Sent by: Cheryl Nelson 02/07/2001 03:04 PM To: pmatecki@enron.com; dhawke@enron.com cc: stephanie.panus@enron.com Subject: Raymond James Brokerage Agreement Paul, I tried to call you at our scheduled time but you were not available. To expedite the process, let me tell you here what the outstanding issues are: 1. Para. 15 - Can we clarify this last sentence that you put in the most recent draft. What are we meaning to say there? 2. We feel strongly about including the limitation on liability issue. We especially want to limit any liability to punitive damages. We think its mutually beneficial. Did you leave this out intentionally? 3. Did you intentionally reject our draft confidentiality provisions? If you do not have time to call me today, please send back an emailed response. Cheryl Nelson Senior Counsel EB3875 (713) 345-4693
|