Epstein Secrets

largely ministerial actio=s ? the court also disallowed some of your costs on their own, . in addition only on April 3 in an email to my lawyers, Lance indicated that his fees were only $4,115. =br> Michael, as I said, I would like to resolve this matter, . getting th= facts straight will go a long

ceived only on April 3 from your lawyer, Lance Shinder, who advised that according to your own records, you suggested you were owed $204,393.67, and Lance off=red to accept $150,000. 4. you stated you were operating under the 2005 A=reement? were the invoices addressed to roy? or to jay? was the paym

From: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2015 4:02 PM To: Mike Sitrick Subject: Re: Follow up not at all i sent an email to you on thurs, i resend Michael, Thanks for your time yesterday . to hopefully w=rk toward

eived only on April 3 from your lawyer, Lance Shinder, who advised that according to your own records, you suggested you were owed $204,393.67, and Lance offered to accept $150,000. 4. If you were operating under the 2005 Agreement were the invoices addressed to roy or to jay? was the payment you re

From: "jeffrey E." <[email protected]> To: Mike Sitrick Subject: Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 16:44:07 +0000 Privileged and Confidential inbox x Gr Darren Indyke 11:33 AM (56 minutes ago) to me Please

ceived only on April 3 from your lawyer, Lance Shinder, who advised that according to your own records, you suggested you were owed $204,393.67, and Lance offered to accept $150,000. 4. you stated you were operating under the 2005 Agreement? were the invoices addressed to roy? or to jay? was the pay

From: Mike Sitrick To: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Follow up Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 16:06:16 +0000 Jeffrey I am in the midst of another client p

ceived only on April 3 from your lawyer, Lance Shinder, who advised that according to your own records, you suggested you were owed $204,393.67, and Lance offered to accept $150,000. 3 EFTA_R1_01306408 EFTA02341103 4. you stated you were operating under the 2005 Agreement? were the invoices addres

From: Mike Sitrick < Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:31 PM To: jeffrey E. Subject: RE: Follow up Sure From: jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tu

ceived only on April 3 from your lawyer, Lance Shinder, who advised that according to your own records, you suggested you were owed $204,393.67, and Lance offered to accept $150,000. 4. you stated you were operating under the 2005 Agreement? were the invoices addressed to roy? or to jay? was the paym

From: Mike Sitrick Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 10:22 PM To: jeffrey E. Subject: RE: Follow up Jeffrey I have had some time to check the facts. Your informati

ceived only on April 3 from your lawyer, Lance Shinder, who advised that according to your own records, you suggested you were owed $204,393.67, and Lance offered to accept $150,000. 3 EFTA_R1_01632846 EFTA02503828 4. you stated you were operating under the 2005 Agreement? were the invoices addres

From: Mike Sitrick Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2015 11:43 PM To: jeffrey E. Subject: RE: Follow up Off now From: jeffrey E. [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: T

ceived only on April 3 from your lawyer, lance Shinder, who advised that according to your own records, you suggested you were owed $204,393.67, and Lance off=red to accept $150,000. 4. If you were operating under the 2005 Agreement =were the invoices addressed to roy or to jay? was the pa=ment you re

From: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 4:44 PM To: Mike Sitrick Inbox <=iv class="" style> <https://ssIgstatic.com/ui/v1ficons/mail/profile_maskix.pn=> <=div> Darren Indyke 11:33 AM (56 minutes ago) <https: