Sunday, September 23, 2007

How to Inform the Texaco Client It Has Lost to Pennzoil?

Posted by Alan Childress

Reading Jeff's post on the aborted KKR deal for Harman, I assume the deal was actually for 8 Billion with a B.  (It would have to be about some real money.)  That reminded me of the hypothetical game some lawyers and I played back in the 80s:  how would that one side of the telephone conversation go (a la Bob Newhart) if you had to make it to the client Texaco to tell them they (you) had just lost a 10 billion dollar verdict to Pennzoil?  One answer is, "No. Billion with a b."

Another is,  "I have some good news and some bad news:  the good news is, you lost the case."

Blogging | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference How to Inform the Texaco Client It Has Lost to Pennzoil?:


Now, since I have corrected the typo, Alan's post won't make any sense unless it is explained that my post originally referred to a $225 million walkaway payment on an $8 million deal. That would be weird.

Posted by: Jeff Lipshaw | Sep 23, 2007 1:34:54 PM

Not that I need your help to fail to make sense...

Your correction reminds me of a set of law review editors who, after soliciting me to write a Reply to an article by one of their professors, allowed the prof to read my reply and edit his article (unbeknownst to me) before publishing both our pieces. It made me look like a complete idiot, including several "misquotes" I made of his article.

Anytime I see a reference to KKR, I can't help but think of Henry Kravis's frosty portrayal (great job by Jonathan Pryce) in HBO's Barbarians at the Gate, especially the scene where he disapproves of smoking while sitting in the offices of RJ Reynolds. And Peter Riegert suddenly recognizing what the smokeless cigarette tastes like.

Posted by: Childress | Sep 23, 2007 2:48:11 PM

Post a comment