Enron Mail

From:peter.keohane@enron.com
To:james.derrick@enron.com, mark.haedicke@enron.com, richard.sanders@enron.com
Subject:Litigation Counsel Approval - Lakeside Packers
Cc:mark.taylor@enron.com, greg.johnston@enron.com
Bcc:mark.taylor@enron.com, greg.johnston@enron.com
Date:Fri, 11 May 2001 06:35:00 -0700 (PDT)

FYI, following-up on this matter, after discussing the matter with their
counsel and confronted with a $3.5MM lawsuit, Lakeside acknowledged the deal
and executed our paper. Regards, Peter.
---------------------- Forwarded by Peter Keohane/CAL/ECT on 05/11/2001 01:25
PM ---------------------------

Enron Capital & Trade Resources
Canada Corp.

From: Peter Keohane 04/30/2001 10:26 AM


To: James Derrick/Enron@EnronXGate, Mark E Haedicke/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard B
Sanders/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Greg Johnston/CAL/ECT@ECT, Sharon
Crawford/CAL/ECT@ECT
Subject: Litigation Counsel Approval - Lakeside Packers

We have a counterparty (Lakeside Packers) who refuses to perform to a 5 year
fixed for floating power swap which commenced Jan. 01 and is C$2.5MM
(US$1.7MM) in the money to us and booked (we would take a hit to earnings by
that amount to unwind the deal). Unfortunately, without the involvement of
Legal, the deal was executed without paper, but on the basis that it was
subject to our standard ISDA documentation. The Confirm was sent out on that
basis but not executed by the counterparty. There was some agreement on
guarantee support, but as this was less clear to get the underlying deal put
in place, with the approval of Credit, we gave up the requirement for the
guarantee in our subsequent discussions and demand letter.

We want to pursue the matter by commencing litigation.

Lakeside is traditionally represented by Blakes.

My suggestion would be to use the Duncan McCachen firm, a litigation boutique
who we have used in the past (CIBC litigation). Mike McCachen has a good
understanding of the trading business for a litigation lawyer.
Alternatively, I would suggest Clarke Hunter of Macleod Dixon who is
currently representing us on the NGX litigation and who also has a good
understanding of out trading business. Mike is a little more aggressive than
Clarke, to my preference.

We would like to proceed as soon as possible as our demand letter expired
last week, and our calls this morning were not dealt with satisfactorily.

Peter.