Enron v. Calpine

Have we received a settlement offer? I saw Kevin Presto yesterday and he asked me about it. Lets talk today.
----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 06/05/2001 06:01 AM -----

"Bill W. Ogden" <bogden@ogwb.com< 05/31/2001 10:02 AM Please respond to bogden To: "Andy Edison" <andrew.edison@enron.com< cc: "Bonnie White" <bonnie.white@enron.com<, "Laura Gibson" <lgibson@ogwb.com<, "Richard Sanders" <richard.b.sanders@enron.com< Subject: Enron v. Calpine

Andy:

To recap our conversation yesterday, here is where we stand on the Calpine
matter.

I made our settlement offer of $1 million to Tom Ganucheau by telephone on
Friday, May 18. Tom told me that his client contact was out of the office
until May 23 or 24 but that he would relay the offer as quickly as he could.
I spoke with Tom again by telephone last week and he volunteered that he was
"working on" getting me a reply.

We have had 3 minor successes in pretrial skirmishing that may make a
settlement offer more attractive at this time. First, we won our motion to
compel, which requires that Calpine produce abstracts of all its power
purchase and sale agreements in all NERC regions. They had moved for a
protective order which would limit their production to the contracts in
ERCOT. Their expanded production is due June 11. Second, we won our motion
to continue or extend the deadline to reply to Calpine's motion for summary
judgment. We filed a reply anyway out of an abundance of caution, but the
court ruled that we were entitled to additional time, partly becasue of its
ruling on expanding the scope of contract discovery outside ERCOT. Our
supplemental reply to the summary judgment motion is due June 22. Third,
Calpine lost on its motion to compel, in which they had sought an order from
the court requiring us to produce additional information on our damage
claim. You should have a copy of our reply to Calpine's motion, in which we
detailed the evidence already produced on damages. We still need to update
some of the damage claim based on information that came out in Ed Baughman's
deposition, and Bonnie is working with Doug Gilbert-Smith on this.

Elizabeth Sager's deposition is scheduled for June 13. Jim Fallon's
deposition is scheduled for June 14. A prep session for Sager is scheduled
for June 7; a prep session for Fallon is scheduled for June 12. In addition
to the pleading and discovery deadlines noted above, we also have a pleading
amendment deadline on June 20, and an expert report deadline of June 29. We
have already met with Ron Vollmar about producing his expert report. We have
drafted an amended complaint, which we needed to do anyway since the case
was removed from state court and we were still on the state court original
petition. The amended complaint will add a specific count pleading
ambiguity/implied contract, to bolster the admissability of extrinsic
evidence, and a promissory estoppel claim in the alternative.

I will let you know as soon as I hear anything in response to our
settlement offer, and in the meantime, please don't hesitiate to call if you
have questions or comments on any of these matters.

Best regards,

Bill