Subject: ACC/WP FW: Settlement- Russell v Walsh, Case No. CGC-18-570137 From: "Ned Gelhaar" To: "S Grant Russell" Cc: "Darren Enenstein" , "Ruth Dayan Eget" , "Omar Rodriguez" Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 19:24:28 +0000 v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} Sent the below to Tara (minus The Hammer reference since it would infringe upon Ruth’s trademark rights).  Please call re the other matters at your earliest convenience.   From: Ned Gelhaar <ngelhaar@enensteinlaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 5, 2020 11:20 AM To: Tara Walsh <tarawalsh0127@gmail.com> Cc: Chris Pacetti <cpacetti@enensteinlaw.com>; Ruth Dayan Eget <rdeget@enensteinlaw.com>; Omar Rodriguez <orodriguez@enensteinlaw.com> Subject: Re: Settlement- Russell v Walsh, Case No. CGC-18-570137   Dear Ms. Walsh:  To begin with, we strongly recommend that you retain counsel in this case.  I will not debate the facts or the law with you, but we welcome and share your stated desire to settle the case or go through the mediation process (which I assume is what you meant when you said “arbitration”).  I suggest you make a settlement offer.  Alternatively, I attach the San Francisco Superior Court’s “ADR Packet” which discusses options.   Regards,   Ned Gelhaar Shareholder     Philadelphia Office Two Logan Square 100 N. 18 th  Street, Suite 300 Philadelphia PA 19103 C: 626.320.3598 T: 215.990.9057 F: 215.359.1919   New York Office 711 Third Avenue  17th Floor  New York, NY 10017 T: 212.622.7180 F: 212.584.9575   This email, including any attachments, is confidential and privileged. If you are not an intended recipient, please delete the email and notify the sender. We are not tax advisors and any communications by us should not be construed as tax advice or used for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax- related matters addressed herein.   From: Tara Walsh < tarawalsh0127@gmail.com > Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 9:34 AM To: Omar Rodriguez < orodriguez@enensteinlaw.com >; Ned Gelhaar < ngelhaar@enensteinlaw.com > Subject: Settlement- Russell v Walsh, Case No. CGC-18-570137   All,   I assume you have seen the ruling from the NY Supreme Court granting my motion to dismiss. They demonstrated some pretty good laws, some of which are applicable to California as well.   I have no interest in going through this process with your client and he knows I have no money. Primarily, it is not in our daughter's best interest to find out about this from the internet when she gets older.    I did no wrong to your client and he knows that. There is no cause or reason I would want to harm him- in fact only the exact opposite. The two times I have openly admitted to putting Seroquel in his wine, Steve was not even working. Less then two weeks later when I admitted to doing so Steve told me he "understood" and was not "mad". He also took the medication every night in addition to my Adderall (including frequently stealing it). I don't even know what the damages he suffered would be for.   I would like to settle this thing or at least go through the arbitration process. If Steve wants me to sign something that I will not ever distribute the videos/pictures I have of him I am more than happy to do so. I do not ask for anything in return for the harms he has caused me- I would rather just move forward in my life.    Thank you,   Tara