Message-ID: <8677877.1075850590651.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 04:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: sarah.novosel@enron.com
To: steven.kean@enron.com, richard.shapiro@enron.com, linda.robertson@enron.com, 
	james.steffes@enron.com
Subject: Draft Enron Supreme Court Reply Brief
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Sarah Novosel
X-To: Steven J Kean, Richard Shapiro, Linda Robertson, James D Steffes
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Steven_Kean_Nov2001_5\Notes Folders\Notes inbox
X-Origin: KEAN-S
X-FileName: skean.nsf

We had a meeting at Wilmer Cutler's office today to discuss the reply brief 
(due on July 2).  Attached is the first draft of the brief -- a redraft will 
be circulated COB Wednesday which will revise this brief somewhat but not 
significantly.  I will circulate the revised brief once I receive it.  Wilmer 
asks that we get comments back to them by Noon on Friday.  

Lou feels very good about New York being defeated in its petition.  Almost 
all of the intervenor briefs have been against New York, and Lou thinks he 
can almost promise that the Court will not rule in favor of New York.

With regard to Enron's position, Lou feels that we have the upper hand 
legally but he is concerned that our position lacks passion -- a reason why 
the Court should rule against the regulator.  We talked about ways to augment 
the reply brief to show the court why it must overturn FERC on the bundled 
retail transmission issue.  

At the end of the meeting, I asked Lou to give us his best guess at our odds 
of prevailing.  Very informally, and somewhat in jest, Lou gives us a 37.5 
percent chance of winning the bundled transmission argument.  John, another 
attorney at Wilmer working on the brief, gives us a 42 percent chance of 
prevailing.  Although these are non-binding, informal estimates, I thought 
everyone would like to hear the odds our Supreme Court council are giving us.

Please let me know if you have any comments on the brief by noon on Friday.

Thanks 

Sarah


 - Combined reply draft v6.doc