From: jeffrey E. <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 2:29 PM To: Kathy Ruemmler Subject: Re: great On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:27 AM, «= href="mailto target="_blank"> wrote: Payment doesn't need to go through Latham. I do th=s all the time. I retained Deloitte on behalf of the bank, but the b=nk pays Deloitte directly. Arrangement is solely for purposes of mai=taining privilege. Sent from my iPhone On Jul =3, 2015, at 10:22 AM, jeffrey E. <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]=m» wrote: lets discuss, =AO issues - bank vs family, latham covel ? d=nt want to run 40 million thru latham many iterations , =m open =n Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:16 AM, ><=span> wrote: If y=u are a consultant to me at Latham, it doesn't create any of the issue= you were concerned about. I would open a new client matter represen=ing the family, and then retain you as a consultant in connection with tha= matter. From a privilege perspective, that is the best way to do it= Sent from my iPhone On Jul 23, 2015, at 6:58 =M, jeffrey E. <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]» wrote: awake? On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Kathy Ruemmler <mailto > wrote: shots? EFTA_R1_01617091 EFTA02493734