From: Brad Edwards cza. To: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL - FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 13:08:57 +0000 CONFIDENTIAL - FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY While these proposals are being conveyed simultaneously, each is independent of the others, and the resolution of any one case is not in any way contingent on the resolution of any other. DRAFT STRICTLY FOR CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY [Note: After much discussion you have asked that we get put together a proposal in writing to resolve the various matters you have defined as those you have an interest in resolving. I have done that in the draft below. This document is for discussion purposes only. It is not a binding commitment, or even an offer, to settle any dispute on the terms listed herein. Further advice as to ethical and other considerations would be secured before proceeding with a possible settlement. It is understood that this discussion draft is intended to be vetted by legal counsel of all concerned individuals.' Case on Edwards/Epstein (1) The determination of who pays and what amount will be determined by an appellate decision. This concept was derived from the idea of resolving this case, which is currently in a state of flux in the appellate court, as quickly as is ,practicable. In that regard, it makes most sense for the resolution to be based exclusively on something that will absolutely happen, as opposed to something that might happen at sometime in the future; the less the number of variables the better. The trial court granted Summary Judgment in Epstein's favor. The 4th DCA is reviewing that ruling. If the 4th DCA upholds the trial court ruling in Epstein's favor, then Edwards will pay Epstein SI M; if the 4th DCA rules in any way other than to affirm the Summary Judgment in Epstein's favor, then Epstein will play Edwards $10M. The decision in the 4th DCA is the only definite future event. Beyond that is