|
October 13, 1989 Robert L. Vogel, Esq. Commercial Litigation Branch
Dear Mr. Vogel: Thank you for your letter of September 27, 1989. We are, of course, pleased with the effort you have put into this matter and feel that the apparent results are not unearned. The concept of "past" and "future" damages, as those terms might have special meaning in the referenced cause, have never been defined for us, and our many request for definitive information remain unanswered. From Ballew’s point of view the question of damages seems quite simple and uncomplicated. Any recovery by suit or settlement within the scope of the civil action filed by him would be subject to his percentage participation as set forth in the Act. In the absence of any description we presently have absolutely no idea what items or categories of damages have been included or excluded as "past" or "future" damages in your negotiations to date. We understand, therefore, that Ballew will not be precluded from recovering whatever sums he may be entitled to under the Act and that the nature rther than the nomenclature of damages will be controlling. We further understand that we will be provided with full disclosure and explaination. Yours very truly, James Henley Morgan |
