EFTA02660804

From: Noam Chomsky Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2018 1:37 AM To: jeffrey E.; Valeria Chomsky Subject: Fwd: Marital Trust > Just got this from Harry. I'm inclined to w=ite a brief response saying that he =an consult with lawyers if he likes, but I don't have to. There is no =roblem at all with the proposal. I might also a=d something about my response to his letter of March 29 and why I simply d=smissed it. OK? Forwarded message From: Harry Chomsky <harry@chomsky.net> Date: Fri, May =8, 2018 at 1:44 PM Subject: Re: Marital Trust To: Noam Chomsky «= href="mailto Cc: Av= Chomsky < > > > », Diana Chomsky This is an in=eresting idea. We could consider it further, but I would need the ad=ice of my lawyer — and I assume you would want your own lawyer'=s advice as well — to ensure that any agreement we reach is consis=ent with Massachusetts law and satisfies the interests, needs, and obligat=ons of everybody involved. Perhaps, as a next step, you could ask yo=r lawyer to contact mine and begin a discussion in which we all participat=. I'm also curious to hear your thoughts abou= the proposals I suggested in my message on March 29th. On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:05 AM, Noam Chomsky <nchom=ky3@gmail.com <mailto > wrote: As I wrote a little while ago, I did write a long r=sponse to your last -- deeply depressing -- letter, but decided not to sen= it. I may return to that letter later but will keep to some factual=matters that ought to be cleared up. But now I'm wr=ting just about one point, which seems to be the core of the problem -- a =roblem, which, again, I don't understand. But let's put that=aside, though I hope we can clear it up soon. All of this is a =painful cloud that I never would have imagined would darken my late years.=/div> The core issue seems to be the marital trust.4>=A0 I've explained how M and I actually set it up with Eric, which seem=d to us just plain common sense. I've also explained Max's d=fferent interpretation. I've asked you for yours, but haven'= heard it. But let's put that aside too, and just resolve the ma=ter, as can be done very simply -- with no need for lawyers to explain the=fiduciary responsibility of the trustee I appointed years ago to replace m=, something I never paid any attention to before. EFTA_R1_01908629 EFTA02660804 So I suggest that we proc=ed this way, and end the whole matter -- at least, whatever it is that I u=derstand about what is of concern to you. 0 =idly> 2 EFTA_R1_01908630 EFTA02660805