- 86 -
May 22, 1987 letter, Mr. Kersting objected to Chicoine and
Hallett's recommendation of a 20-percent settlement in pertinent
part as follows:
As I have done several times now I ask you again NOT to
communicate to anyone of my friends a prospect of a 20%
settlement. The 50% flop has left a $40,000.00 to
$50,000.00 scar with us. It was a lesson I will take
with me to the other side. I trust that you have
reconsidered by now your position in the matter and
that you will NOT go into an adverse stance to me and
my enterprises. I assure you that the jolt of April
27th has not worn off yet.
On June 10, 1987, Mr. Kersting forwarded to Mr. Chicoine a
letter that he had received from Mr. DeCastro pertaining to a
settlement that Mr. DeCastro purportedly negotiated on behalf of
Boyd S. and Jeannette F. Proctor. By letter dated June 16, 1987,
Mr. Chicoine responded to Mr. Kersting, stating that he was
satisfied that the Proctors did not receive a settlement in
excess of 50 percent as Mr. Kersting had suggested because the
figures in question did not include the Proctors' liability for
statutory interest. Mr. Chicoine concluded that the settlement
was in the range of a 14-percent reduction of the Proctors'
deficiency.
On November 4, 1987, Mr. Kersting sent Mr. Hallett a letter
which states in pertinent part:
Here I asked you about a year ago to defend my
friends, here I had high hopes and reasonable
expectation that you would work with us, that we would
work on consensus and to the common benefit of my
friends and here I find that you not only do not care
to do that, you are actually moving into an adversary
position. And this after I have paid you an enormous
amount of legal fees and after I have disciplined
myself over and over again to keep my temper as I
Page: Previous 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011