From: Valeria Chomsky To: "Jeffrey E." <[email protected]> Subject: Some points Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 16:14:57 +0000 If it is Noam's money, how come that Deborah, our lawyer, told me in a meeting in her office that Noam did not have the right to access the money from the marital trusts anymore, because it was like he had given that money to his children already when he secured the money in a trust having the children as the beneficiaries. Therefore the money could not even be considered as part of Noam's estate anymore. She told me that this was the reason why she stated that I would be the ONLY recipient of ALL Noam's estate (meaning one IRA). She started representing both of us and said that she needed to balance my interests with Noam's children interests. Which seemed reasonable to me. But now, thanks to you, we see that there was a major flaw in her approach, because although I am not a beneficiary of the marital trust, Noam has the right to use the money for his own living and certainly to pay taxes, which had been his only request. In 2014, right after Noam and I got married, Harry asked for a meeting with us and Max and Harry flew to Boston. Max was the one to tell me that I should find a I ne to tell us in the first meeting at when Noam, Hany and I were present that he was NOT representing Harry, he was NOT representing ME, but he was representing ONLY Noam. Then, although I did not agree having a different lawyer than my husband's, Noam thought it would be better to follow Max's advice and then I talked to a lawyer who I had worked with in the the law firm in Boston, in the 1990, but who was not specialized in the field. Max talked to the lawyer in advance and we arranged a meeting in this lawyer's office in Boston. Max presented his proposal and the lawyer agreed with Max's proposal that I would receive $25 thousand dollars, Noam's social security pension ($2 thousand), Noam's pension from MIT ($2,000). Noam and I w