LAWYER--CLIENT CONFIDENTIAL

Jim:

Thanks for sending me a copy of your e-mail.

How do you propose to convince the Navajo Nation that TWO means what it
says on the standard terms and conditions--Strate talking or litigation,
or something else? If it is Strate talking, when and to whom?

Take Care,

LAR

Jim Mccartney wrote:

> louie, i do not expect the navajos to abort this deal
> by a hard line position on the standard terms and
> conditions. i do expect that they will take a hard
> line position until they believe we mean what we say.
> we have had completely contradictory expressions from
> them--at one time they said they understood our
> concerns and thought they could accomodate them. at
> others times they have said "standard terms and
> conditons, take it or leave it". i agree with lynn
> that we should have very low expectations of federal
> courts relieving us of the terms of our deal--perhaps
> only to the extent the public interest demands it.
> this is clearly a management call, but i continue to
> recommend against taking the risks associated with the
> general terms and conditions. jim
> --- Louis.Soldano@enron.com wrote:
> > Larry Ruzow met with the Navajo DOJ (a Jim Fitting,
> > Esq. ) yesterday
> > afternoon on another matter.  In the course of the
> > meeting,
> > Mr. Fitting made clear that the DOJ will oppose any
> > deal that calls for
> > disputes to be adjudicated in any
> > forum other than the Navajo Nation Courts (and that
> > this meant DOJ
> > opposition to arbitration as well.)
> >
> > Larry expressed that we should not expect Ms. Tapahe
> > (who is more militant
> > on sovereignty-related
> > issues) to be willing to compromise on forum issues.
> >
> > He did remind me of the Resources Committee process.
> >
> > At this point we will attempt a meeting regardless
> > and report back on
> > progress.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!
> http://mail.yahoo.com/