Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00979087DOJ Data Set 9Other

From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]>

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
efta-efta00979087
Pages
2
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> To: ' ' < Subject: Re: Fw: Revised Separation Agreement Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:42:33 +0000 Do not On Thursday, December 12, 2013, wrote: Shall I add # let's try to finish today- sign fri ? Or to desperate sounding ? Sent via BlacicBerry by AT&T From: Jeffrey Epstein <[email protected]> Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 11:24:39 -0400 To: Stephen Hanson< Subject: Re: Revised Separation Agreement so ellis is the scumbag. can howie provide nits ?, . we will agree today on big, and sign tomorrow. On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Stephen Hanson < > wrote: Response below. From: Ellis Rinaldi [mailto: Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 10:02 AM To: Steve Hanson; Barry Sternlicht Cc: Dan Yih; Eric Franklin; Stephenson, Tim; Charnas, Brandon S.; Subject: RE: Revised Separation Agreement We will discuss 1-3 and get back to you. On 4 ... it is best if you give us all your comments. a minor markup of your remaining "nits" is best. Re "negligent disclosure" it has been in the past drafts and every atty knows what it means. Your counsel can explain it to you. Thx. From: Steve Hanson [mailto Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2013 9:29 AM To: Barry Sternlicht Cc: Dan Yih; Ellis Rinaldi; Eric Franklin; Stephenson, Tim; Charnas, Brandon S.; Subject: RE: Revised Separation Agreement Barry. EFTA00979087 We are just about there, The lawyers are reviewing the language today, and we should be able to close today or tomorrow. A few questions/thoughts: 1. If you follow the previous email trail and document revisions from your side, the last document from your side agreed to the non-compete limited to NY and NJ, mirroring the agreement in our LLC operating agreement. When I asked for you to consider allowing a carve-out for 2 restaurants, I thought that the carve-out was for 2 restaurants located in NY and NJ. The last draft showed a change eliminating the opportunity for me to being able to work in the entire United States, except for 2 restaurants outside of NY and NJ? Thoughts? 2. I think it reasonable that I should be given notice, if you guys think I breached our agreement and a period within which to cure the breach. mirroring all our o 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 Jeffrey Epstein 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 EFTA00979088

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.