by Susan Rieger
More to the point, 3M called her husband last night on his inside line at home and told him if he wanted the meeting, he’d have to set it up, since Kahn was being a first-class asshole (her word). This morning at 9:06, Kahn’s secretary called to say we could meet July 7, 4 p.m., in their offices. 3M says her husband gets up at 5:45 and makes his business calls at 7, leaving terse, acerbic messages when the sluggards aren’t there to answer. Do you want to attend? I assume not, but then you might not trust me to behave myself in the same room with Kahn. Do I have to shake his hand? My plan is to reiterate the offer I sent them. It’s their turn for the counter-counter. Do you agree?
Drama
* * *
From: Mia Meiklejohn
To: Sophie Diehl
Date: Wed, 7 July 1999 18:02:47
Subject: Drama 7/7/99 6:02 PM
Dear Sophie—
I want to apologize to you for making a scene in Kahn’s office. (I don’t want to apologize to anyone else; I needed to get a few things off my chest, and I find I love embarrassing Daniel. The end of the white-glove wife.) I also want to thank you for standing up for me. Kahn is a swine, there’s no other word for him. Do you know Becky Danton, formerly Becky Peele? Felix Someone in your firm represented her, and Kahn represented her husband, Jason Peele, ex-chair of Narragansett Industries, in their divorce. How’s that for fearful symmetry. Maybe you read the file? I recommend it. It is unbelievable, except, of course, it isn’t, because there it all is, in black and white, in our very own Tyler County Court House. In Becky’s case, Kahn ordered DNA tests for their three children, ages 11, 6, and 2, to make sure they were her husband’s. She told me all about Kahn over dinner last Friday. Our daughters are in the same class at Peabody. We’d talked a few times in the parking lot, she was very kind when she heard that D and I had separated, but she called me up last week and said we should get together; she might be able to provide useful information. She’d heard from a friend at the hospital that Daniel had hired Kahn. She’s filed charges against him, against Kahn, with the state bar, and they’re doing an investigation. (There’s an NA law about the assumption of paternity within marriage that he apparently violated by ordering DNA tests for the children when Jason Peele hadn’t claimed adultery.) I don’t know if you caught that reference in my tirade, but Kahn plainly did. I don’t know that Daniel knows he is up on ethics charges. (My father did a hostile takeover of NI two years ago and ousted Peele. Peele had a golden parachute, which my father refused to pay. They’re still in litigation; if my father has his way, which I expect will happen, Peele will die in chancery. Becky said to kiss my father on both cheeks for her.)
My analyst is always telling me to be “awake at the moment.” Well, I was awake this afternoon. I said everything I wanted to say, everything I needed to say, even everything I could have hoped to say. Even now, in repose, I can’t think of anything I’d want to have done or said differently, though if I had had a fork at hand, I might have plunged it into Daniel’s thigh or Kahn’s throat. But that would have been a mistake; that would have been going too far.
Now I suppose we must get down to business, get “serious,” as you said to them.
My cousin wants to do the story on the sick children; he just doesn’t have the staff now to do it. I like knowing that; it’s like money in the bank.
Best,
Mia
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
From: Sophie Diehl
To: David Greaves
RE: Meiklejohn/Durkheim Conference, July 7, 1999
Date: July 8, 1999
Attachments: Email from Mia Meiklejohn, July 7, 1999, “Drama”
So, we met yesterday afternoon, Durkheim, Kahn, 3M, and I, to talk about a settlement. Only, we didn’t do it. Kahn’s gambit, something about sending an adjuster to assess the Martha’s Vineyard property, set her off, and I mean “off.” She looked at him straight on and said, “After the assessment, are you planning on ordering any DNA tests for Jane? I hope you’ll let me know if you are, because I’m prepared to go to the state bar if you do.” She then turned to Daniel. “You know, don’t you, that Kahn is very thorough and he doesn’t think a husband should pay child support for a child who may not be his. Has he said he’s planning to test Jane?” I thought Durkheim would pop a blood vessel. She then went on, turning to Kahn, who was gulping for air. “I believe that all your other clients work in the carting business, isn’t that so?” Then she turned to her husband: “I’m assuming you gave him his retainer in cash, tens and twenties, right?” Kahn looked daggers at her, his face blotchy with anger. Before she could regroup, Durkheim stepped in. “Let’s get down to business. Let’s talk about alimony. Where do you get off thinking you should get $72,000 a year?” 3M turned her gimlet eye to her husband. “Getting you off, asshole, for 17 years.” She then gave a brief disquisition on their sex life, which ended with the line “I always thought you could f*** a corpse, that you’d prefer it, actually.” I turned to look at Durkheim as she was speaking. His face was at war, equal parts anger and embarrassment. For a nice-looking, rumpled man, his mouth had taken an ugly turn. He looked at me, then Kahn. I did a facial shrug (mouth down, eyebrows up). Kahn, his manhood unimpeached, leapt in, waxing indignant and pomp-ass. “Miss Diehl, I’ve never heard anything like that in my life. Really, you need to keep your client in check.” I threw him a sitcom double take, the way Elaine might do it. “Give me a break, Mr. Kahn,” I said. “This is nursery school stuff, and you know it. Tell your client to stop acting aggrieved and behaving as though he doesn’t have an obligation to support his wife and child at a level they are entitled to be supported at, and we’ll come up with a workable agreement.” I then turned to 3M and said, “I don’t think they’re serious. Let’s go.” And out we walked.
I haven’t given you the full report; I can’t bring myself to do it. I hope you understand. There were words I never heard anyone but Richard Pryor say. She was firing away, rat-a-tat, rat-a-tat, so fast and furiously I couldn’t keep up with her. I had to take a few deep breaths to keep my countenance, as Papa used to say. When we got out onto the street, I asked, “Spontaneous or rehearsed?” She smiled slyly. “Just great good luck,” she said. The DNA testing was a reference to the Peele divorce. Flush with victory, 3M sent me the attached email last night. It provides color.
Narragansett Statutes
Title 33 of the Narragansett Code, Sections 801ff.
Dissolution of Marriage, Annulment, and Legal Separation
Sec. 806. Paternity establishment.
There is a presumption that a child born during a marriage is the issue of the marriage, and no person may challenge this presumption save the parties to the marriage.
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
From: Proctor Hand
To: Sophie Diehl
RE: The Maria Maple Mather Meiklejohn Trusts
Date: July 9, 1999
Attachments:
Mrs. Meiklejohn’s will, probated in 1982, set up two trusts, one for Mia Meiklejohn and one for Cordelia Meiklejohn. Each trust had an original principal of $400,000. Mia’s vests on her 50th birthday. I am her sole trustee. Cordelia’s money will remain in trust, with Bruce Meiklejohn and me acting as trustees, until Cordelia’s death, at which time the remaining funds, if any, will be settled on Mia or, if she has died, her children. Cordelia’s trusts may be invaded for purposes of “necessity,” Mia’s for “emergency” purposes only. To date, there have been no invasions. The money has been invested in blue chip stocks averaging approximately 8% a year. Each currently stands at $1.47 million. Under the rule of 72, I would expect Ms. Meiklejohn’s to
double by the time it vests.
I can, if you think it useful, provide a trustee’s letter to Dr. Durkheim, outlining the terms of his wife’s trust and its current balance. I submit a letter annually to Probate Court; I can send him a copy. I can also include in the covering letter, if you like, a paragraph on the Vineyard property. I understand the other side keeps raising the matter of the Vineyard property. It might be helpful if they knew the terms limiting its use.
Let me know if you need anything else. It is my position that the terms of Bruce Meiklejohn’s will are irrelevant to any settlement talks.
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
MEMORANDUM
Attorney Work Product
From: Sophie Diehl
To: David Greaves
RE: The Maria Maple Mather Meiklejohn Trust
Date: July 9, 1999
Attachments: Meiklejohn Trust Memo
I’ve spoken to Proctor and examined Mrs. Meiklejohn’s trust. Proctor also wrote a brief memo, which I attach here. Some interesting additional facts: Mrs. Meiklejohn (4M) died in 1979; it took three years to settle her estate. There must have been a lot of other money and property. 3M’s “issue” is the residual beneficiaries of both trusts. If there are no children surviving, the money goes to Planned Parenthood of New Salem. (Proctor says 4M was on their board and helped underwrite the first abortion-rights case in Narragansett, McMillan v. Bishop, which pre-Roe upheld the right to abortion in Narragansett in the first 16 weeks.)
In the last 17 years, both trusts have grown considerably, the beneficiaries of early investment and a rising market. (Go Suze Orman; oh, for the courage to be rich.) By the time 3M’s vests, it may have reached $3 million. The annual statements have been sent to Bruce Meiklejohn, which probably explains 3M’s ignorance. In the event of Proctor’s death or retirement from the firm, William Frost is Proctor’s successor trustee. Frost’s successor trustee, should it come to that, is the then-managing partner of Traynor, Hand. If you live a very long time…
In light of this trust and the Vineyard house tenancy, we can be more flexible on the 401(k), etc., but not on the matter of alimony. 3M doesn’t need a retirement fund, but she does need money for the next seven years. No doubt Dr. D and Kahn will argue in favor of invading the trust now. I’ll do a quick survey of the law and find out what the standard for an “emergency” is. Proctor has offered to write a letter to Kahn. Kahn’s going to go ape with this. I can hear him now, accusing us of withholding important information that affects every part of the agreement.
Trust
* * *
From: Sophie Diehl
To: Mia Meiklejohn
Date: Fri, 9 July 1999 16:02:19
Subject: Trust 7/9/99 4:02 PM
Mia—
I’m following up on our conversation regarding your mother’s trust. I will be sending you overland a formal letter, giving the terms of the trust and also the restrictions on the Aquinnah property. You can show the letter to Daniel and see what he has to say. I think he was truly shocked by the DNA testing. (Caveat: he may not remember his horror, however, given the meeting’s second act.) If we can’t count on Daniel’s better nature in the negotiations, we can count on his political instincts. He has a reputation to maintain in this community, and roughing up Bruce Meiklejohn’s daughter and granddaughter will do him no good if it gets about, especially after he bankrupted the fireman. And on that score, word about that has got around. Peter Maple? Nothing Jason Peele did ever surprised anyone. That was the source of his great success. He’d do whatever was necessary to succeed, though I’m guessing he drew the line at violent felonies. I can’t imagine the person who would have married him, and yet you say she’s lovely. But I digress. Let me know how the conversation goes. You’re a brave woman.
Yours,
Sophie
TRAYNOR, HAND, WYZANSKI
222 CHURCH STREET
NEW SALEM, NARRAGANSETT 06555
(393) 876-5678
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
July 9, 1999
Mia Meiklejohn
404 St. Cloud Street
New Salem, NA 06556
Dear Mia:
I have two items for you to think about as we work on coming up with a settlement. The first regards the trust set up under your mother’s will. The second involves the property on Martha’s Vineyard.
As to the first item, I have spoken with Proctor Hand, who serves as Trustee of the Maria Maple Mather Meiklejohn Trust. He has provided the following report as of June 30, 1999. The trust in your name was set up in 1982 with $400,000. It will vest on your 50th birthday. It currently has approximately $1,470,000. At 8% interest (which it is averaging), it is likely to double by 2007. It can be invaded prior to vesting for “emergencies” but not for ordinary support (i.e., food, clothing, shelter, or education).
As to the second item, prior to her death, your mother donated 8 acres of the 13 she owned in Gay Head (now Aquinnah) to the Martha’s Vineyard Land Bank. These acres cannot be developed; they can be used for agricultural cultivation or pasture. The other 5 acres cannot be subdivided; there is a 3-acre lot minimum for houses in the area. While the 5 acres, with their views and protected farmlands, are valuable, they are not as valuable as your husband and his lawyer believe. The house, as I understand, is in serious disrepair and has no particular architectural value, being an ordinary, run-down 1840 Greek Revival farmhouse with less than 3,000 square feet, a damp 4-foot cellar, blocked chimneys, a kitchen last updated in the Depression, and no inside commodes. (Proctor said he spent the most uncomfortable weekend of his life at that house. “As much as I loved Maria,” he said, “she could never get me up again. The outhouse was a completely uncharming feature.”)
As the benefits of both the trust and the house do not accrue to you in the near future, they should not figure in the settlement negotiations for child care and alimony.
You may wish to discuss this with your husband. I will also send a letter to Mr. Kahn.
Yours,
Anne Sophie Diehl
Stupendous
* * *
From: Sophie Diehl
To: Maggie Pfeiffer
Date: Mon, 12 July 1999 8:41:07
Subject: Stupendous 7/12/99 8:41 AM
Dear Maggie—
What a wonderful weekend. You were fabulous. I didn’t know the play; I haven’t seen much Shaw (I saw the movie My Fair Lady on TV; not as good as Seven Brides for Seven Brothers, but then what is?), and I’m always confusing him with Wilde. But what a fabulous lark. I don’t think there’s anything you can’t do.
You won’t believe this: Maman and I ran into Papa yesterday at lunch on our way out of town. We were eating at the diner on the Pittsfield Road, and in he walked. He’d been to the play last night. Did he go backstage to see you? Did you hear from him? No, of course not. Stealth Diehl. He came right over to the table. “You saw her, didn’t you,” he said, without so much as a hug or even a hello. He was so pleased with you, so proud. He kept saying, “Isn’t she wonderful? Isn’t she brilliant?” We agreed. He was very charming to Maman. “How are you, Elisabeth?” he asked. “Still beautiful, I see.” She wasn’t having any of it. “And you, how are you, John, still … still …?” He laughed. “Yes, I’m afraid so.” And what I want to know, Maggie, is this: Can’t he see me, or does he simply find me uninteresting? He paid me no mind. Maman could have been sitting in the booth alone. I hadn’t seen him for months. It was enraging. “How are you, Papa?” I asked, too loudly. “I’m not dying,” he said, “if that’s the drift of your question.” He then smiled. “Well, of course, I’m going to die. It’s in my DNA, but not this year or next or even the one after that. I’m thinking 82. What do you say, Sophie girl?” He then sat down at the booth and talked about his cancer and his decision to watch and wait. Maman thought it a reasonabl
e plan but added, nodding toward me, “I’m not sure our daughter agrees. We haven’t got that American need to do something. I’ve never known an American man with your prognosis who hasn’t immediately signed up for surgery. Americans have no patience.” She stopped then, to make an editorial adjustment. “But with you,” she continued, looking at Papa, “with you, it’s not patience but some sort of balkiness …” She trailed off momentarily. “It’s the Hamlet part of your personality. Not to be confused with the Lear part.” He laughed. “Never waste an opportunity, Elisabeth, that’s what I say.” He then turned (finally!) to me and said he was going to come visit me in September. He asked if I would let him sit in on a motion or a trial I was doing. (He actually used the word motion—who thought he knew it? Could it be now and again he paid attention?) And then he patted my hand, got up, and went to sit at the counter. I know my father is a far better father than yours, but you must admit he has some pretty severe deficits. Maman, as if reading my mind, gave me a sharp look and said, “Sophie, he’s not going to change. He can’t. It all works too well for him. If you don’t let go, you’ll make yourself miserable.”
But wasn’t it just like him to go to see you and never say anything? I think I’m a little jealous. Maybe a lot. He’s so unabashedly proud of you. If you’d been sitting in the diner, he’d have noticed you.