|
|
Enron Mail |
Jim:
I am confused. LeBeouf wanted to represent ENA and EES and Reliant never came up in the conversations. We picked Brobeck and it was painful for LeBoeuf. I think there must be some additional facts relative to New Power. Regards, Mark James Derrick@ENRON 12/15/2000 06:01 PM To: Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Reliant FYI; should we have any discussions with LeBeouf re their representation? Jim ---------------------- Forwarded by James Derrick/Corp/Enron on 12/15/2000 02:11 PM --------------------------- Marc Manly@EES 12/15/2000 08:40 AM To: James Derrick/Corp/Enron@ENRON cc: Subject: Reliant Jim: on the theory that it is better late than never, I attach a summary of the Reliant/Labeouf discussions concerning their potential representation of us in California. It appears that Reliant did finally leave a crack open (it was not so absolute as I had been led to understand). Marc ---------------------- Forwarded by Marc Manly/HOU/EES on 12/15/2000 09:37 AM --------------------------- Kathleen E Magruder 12/14/2000 09:35 PM To: Marc Manly/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: Reliant You have asked that I recount the facts surrounding my failed attempt to hire LaBeouf Lamb to represent New Power in CA before the PUC. In late July, I contacted Chris Hilen with LaBeouf's San Francisco office to ask if he would represent us in the Order Instituting Investigation which arose from the summer's price spikes in San Diego. He said he would check with Reliant to ensure there were no conflicts. When he returned my call, Reliant was unwilling to permit LaBeouf to proceed on our behalf. Because I had been told earlier this year that Reliant would probably never be opposed to us anywhere but Texas in the future, I called a contact at Reliant who referred me to Mike Jines in the general counsel's office. Mr. Jines was unavailable, so I left him a voicemail message. I told him that as I understood it, Reliant is only in the generation business in CA and not in the retail sales of electricity as we are. We should both be interested in options that create better markets, lift rate caps and foment competition. Consequently, I felt there was no conflict here. It took Mr. Jines some days to respond. The intervention date was quickly approaching and needed legal assistance, I turned to Arter Hadden. Some time after we had made that commitment (and after the intervention date), Mr. Jines called and suggested that perhaps something could be worked out. Due to the press of other business, I did not return the call as the immediate situation had been resolved. In October then, as we searched for a lobby firm in Sacramento, one person who was highly recommended told us Reliant would be "extremely uncomfortable" if she were to represent us, too. She opted not to interview with us. Since the message was similar to the original message to LaBeouf, I have moved on to find another lobbyist and have not followed up with Jines. If you would like to discuss this more, please call.
|