Chapter 40: Legal Maneuvers

December 28, 1982, Chicago, Illinois

"Is everything OK?" Shelly asked.

It wasn't, but I didn't want to spread the information further.

"Yes," I replied, and picked up my second slice of pizza.

We finished our pizza, and I took the boxes out to the trashcan, then returned to the front room.

"What's your pleasure?" I asked Katy.

"A reprise of that first time, except we alternate."

"Esme?" I asked.

"Yes!"

"Then we'll say 'good night'," I said.

Katy, Esme, and I all said 'good night' to Bianca and Shelly, then headed up to my room.

"Blowjob, fuck, fuck?" Esme asked.

"That's the plan!" Katy declared.

"Still on the Pill?" I asked.

"Yes! I certainly haven't been a nun at Princeton!"

"High School boys are NOT what I want!" Esme said. "I can't wait to get to college!"

"It's none of my business, and you don't have to answer," I said. "But out of curiosity..."

"Once, with my homecoming date," Esme replied. "That's when I talked to Katy about getting together with you again! Of course, I was pretty sure you'd be with Huifen by now, but Bianca told me you guys broke up, so here I am!"

"Why are we talking instead of fooling around?" Katy asked.

"I have NO idea!" I chuckled.

The three of us quickly took off our clothes, and I was the recipient of two excellent blowjobs before fucking each girl twice in turn. When Esme and I finished, the girls snuggled up next to me, Esme on my right and Katy on my left, and we fell asleep.

December 29, 1982, Chicago, Illinois

My alarm went off at 6:15am on Wednesday morning, and both girls groaned, but got out of bed to shower with me. Unfortunately, because I had to get to the office, we couldn't fool around, so after quick showers, we dried ourselves, dressed, and went downstairs to have a quick breakfast of cereal, fruit, and juice.

"I'm still home next week," Katy said. "I'd love to see you again, if possible."

"It should work," I replied. "Call on Monday evening."

"Cool!" she exclaimed.

"I won't get away with spending the night again," Esme said. "But OK to call you sometime?"

"Yes."

"Awesome!"

We all ate, then they left in Esme's car while I headed to the Hancock Center. There were even fewer people scheduled to be in the office, really no more than a skeleton crew of traders and brokers. That allowed Jack, Bob, and Sandeep to do a complete inventory of all the supply closets, and I had time to work on my spreadsheets. At 10:25am, the phone rang.

"Support Services, Kane," I said.

"Jonathan? This is Stefan Chojnicki. Is this a good time to talk?"

"Yes. It's very quiet in the office."

"Bev said she shared everything with you, so you know what's going on."

"In broad strokes, yes, but I'm not familiar at all with how court cases work beyond Perry Mason."

Stefan laughed, "It's nothing like that! Well, the form is kind of similar, but don't expect it to be like that, or for witnesses to 'crack' on the stand and confess. Bev said you heard from an attorney. Who was it?"

"A Miss Temple," I replied.

"OK. She's an associate, which is the title the most junior people have at a law firm. One of their partners, Evan Miller, is what we call the counsel of record, that is, the attorney responsible for the case."

"What do they want to talk to me about?"

"At this point, I have no idea."

"Should I speak to them?"

"That's up to you. I'm Beverly's and Heather's attorney, not yours, and I can only give you very limited advice. I can answer general questions, though, such as about procedures and so on."

"I told Miss Temple I wouldn't speak to her, and she threatened to get a subpoena."

"Because you're in Illinois, that might be difficult and expensive for them. An Ohio judge could issue the subpoena, but has no jurisdiction over you, as a resident of Illinois. They would need to hire counsel in Illinois, present the subpoena to a judge there, and ask for it to be enforced. I don't know Illinois law, but generally, you would have an opportunity to oppose the subpoena.

"Given the hearing is set for January 19th, there isn't really enough time for them to do that, but they could ask for a continuance, which is a delay in the proceedings. I'd oppose that, and insist they explain why they need to speak with you and what questions they hope to ask. More than likely, the judge would require them to do so, and then we'd argue about it. And, as I said, after all that, they'd have to have an Illinois judge issue a subpoena."

"Who pays?" I asked.

"The other side. It's nearly impossible for them to force Bev to pay their costs, given they started the suit without any discussion with her about visitation."

"Would me talking to them help or hurt Bev's case?"

"I can't say for sure, but the only reason they'd want to speak with you is because it would hurt."

"How did they find me?"

"I'd guess your license plates. From there, they could go to the BMV, or whatever you call it, in Illinois."

"It's the Secretary of State's office. And you likely just explained why someone came to the house on Monday while I was at work and asked if I lived here."

"You rent, right?"

"Yes."

"Then the property records wouldn't confirm you lived there, so they'd send a private investigator to check. That ensures they know how to serve you as soon as they manage to get a subpoena."

"So, what should I do?"

"I cannot advise you on that, except to say you should retain counsel and ask them. Do you have an attorney?"

"I do, though it's for business."

"In this case, it's a question of civil procedure, and he'll know all the ins and outs of the Illinois rules."

"OK. For now, I'm going to refuse, because the last thing I want to do is harm Bev's case."

"Thank you," he replied, conveying his advice in a way that nobody could protest, at least as I saw it.

"I'm going to call my attorney, Nelson Boyd. Is it OK to have him call you with questions?"

"Yes. I can give him my views and opinions, and he can advise you, as your attorney."

We said 'goodbye' and I flashed the switchhook, pressed '9' to get an outside line, and dialed the number for Hart-Lincoln, which I had in a small address book I carried with me. The receptionist put me through to Nelson.

"Nelson, it's Jonathan."

"Hi. What's up?"

I explained the situation and asked for his advice.

"You did the right thing in not speaking to the counsel representing your girlfriend's baby's father."

"Not girlfriend," I replied. "She's my best friend."

"You've never been intimate with her?"

"I have."

"Recently?"

"Yes."

"Then they'll refer to you with some version of 'boyfriend' or 'intimate partner' or some other euphemism they think best serves their cause, whatever it is. My advice remains the same — don't answer their questions. At this point, I can't imagine what good you could do, and you might do significant harm."

"How so?"

"This isn't my area of expertise, and I'd have to refer you to an expert in family law, but one standard tactic is to claim that your friend is an unfit mother, and one way to do that is to say that she's promiscuous."

"Bev is NOT promiscuous," I countered. "Other than the baby's father, she's only ever been with me."

"And that might be enough. While things are changing, she'll be portrayed as a nineteen-year-old single mom with multiple sex partners. And that could be detrimental to her case."

"Do you know how stupid that is?"

"I do, but what I said is true. Things are changing, as I indicated, but because the courts tend to side with mothers, fathers often play the 'slut' card. And if you have multiple partners, they'll try to use THAT to prove a risk to the child."

"That's a load of crap!" I protested.

"I don't disagree, but that is how they'll play it."

"Then I won't speak to them."

"That is the best approach."

"And if they get a subpoena?"

"One issued by an Ohio judge would have no power over you, so long as you don't go to Ohio. If you did, you might be compelled to appear before the judge. Being in Illinois, they'll have to hire counsel, present the subpoena to a circuit court judge here, and ask for it to be enforced. That's an adversarial hearing, which means you're allowed to have representation to fight the subpoena."

"Is that something you could do for me?"

"Yes. It's purely a procedural matter, and there is literally no trouble you can get into here in Illinois unless you fail to comply with a subpoena from an Illinois judge."

"But in Ohio?"

"I'd have to speak to your friend's attorney, but in cases such as this, once the matter is decided, subpoenas are usually vacated, meaning they would have no force."

"Can they use my refusal to speak against Bev?"

"Maybe. If they can prove your relationship, they could investigate you and try to present evidence they felt helped their case, though your friend's counsel would certainly object. A Family Court judge in Illinois has wide latitude in what evidence to consider, as does DCFS, and I suspect the Ohio rules are similar for their courts and agencies. There's literally nothing you can do about that.

"If, and this is speculation, they would get adverse information about you into the hearing, and it was going to be used against your friend, her counsel might ask you to testify to refute their claims or to show that you are not a risk. That's a somewhat risky approach, but it might be necessary. Risky for your friend's case, not you, as none of this can hurt you in any way."

"So, what next?"

"I'll speak to Mr. Chojnicki just to touch base. He'll inform me if a subpoena issues, and you'll be sent a copy. If that happens, let me know, and we'll take it from there."

"How will I get the subpoena?"

"Probably a process server, which in Cook County is usually a Sheriff's deputy or an off-duty cop. Don't try to avoid them, just accept it and call me. It's possible they'll send it via certified mail with a return receipt to save money, but given the short timeframe, I'm certain they'll use a process server."

"Will do. Thanks, Nelson."

We said 'goodbye' and I hung up. I made notes about what he said in Apple Writer II, saved them on a fresh diskette, and put it in my bag, inside a hard plastic case. I was very concerned for Bev, but I didn't know what I could do, short of putting a hit contract on Bob Leahy. I actually laughed out loud at that, because I was reasonably certain I knew someone who could do that, though the cost would be lifetime involvement with the Outfit, something I couldn't seriously contemplate.

Because there really wasn't anything to do but wait, I put that out of my mind and went about the usual tasks I had to do to cover Mr. Nelson's job, which mostly involved writing reports, verifying invoices, and ensuring the staff did their job. The latter was easy, as nobody who didn't do their job lasted long at Spurgeon, and that was made clear in the interviews.

At the end of the day, I left the office and headed to Greek Town for dinner at Diana's with Marcia. I couldn't drink, but I really didn't feel like driving up to Wisconsin just to have a beer and decided I'd settle for a Coke. Marcia could drink, of course, and she ordered red wine to go with her food.

"How was your dinner with the group?" Marcia asked after we'd ordered.

"I think it's better if we just stay away from that topic," I replied. "As I said, I pushed back hard on Jeri and basically gave her an ultimatum. You and I can have a successful relationship and what Jeri says or does is irrelevant, because if she does try to interfere, I won't do anything other than manage her trust until she pulls it and gives it to someone she thinks she can control."

"Money, of course."

"That's my job, Marcia. I don't have to like the people I do business with, and they don't have to like me. What I owe them is to earn the best possible return, what they owe me is their trust that I know what I'm doing."

"Not loyalty?"

I laughed, "Loyalty in the investment business depends on how much money you make for the client. I mean, seriously, why would you stay with someone who earned subpar returns? I suppose someone could do it out of friendship, but I certainly wouldn't expect that.

"Granted, they shouldn't jump ship at the first sign of lower returns, but they sure as heck should pay attention and be ready to move their money. It's just business, and the business is maximum returns commensurate with acceptable risk. Except for this crazy period with record interest rates, risk and reward tend to go in lockstep. The higher the reward, the higher the risk. And that's where hedging comes into play."

"So you don't think your customers should be loyal?"

"They should be loyal to the best return on their capital at the risk level they can tolerate. Nothing more, nothing less."

"So the only way to keep your customers is to be successful?"

"Isn't that true for any company? I mean, if P&G starts producing lousy products, what will happen?"

"People will switch to other brands, obviously."

"And if a politician doesn't deliver what the people want?"

"He'll lose his election, again, obviously."

"So, in the end, no difference, except my product is not toothpaste or legislation, it's the rate of return."

"And you really believe everything is just an exchange of value?"

"In a theoretical sense, that's all it is. But people do not think that way, nor are they purely logical. So while I agree with the theory, I don't follow it in practice."

"You seem to operate almost purely on logic. I mean, I've never seen you show any emotion — you're never sad, never overly excited, and never angry. You're like the most even-keeled, emotionless person I've met. It's like having Mr. Spock as a friend."

"I do become upset, but make every effort to control it, and I do my level best not to show it. As Mr. Matheson and Mr. Spurgeon have both said, if you become emotional about an investment, you're going to lose your shirt. It doesn't matter how much I like a company, if the returns aren't there, they aren't there. That doesn't mean it's not a good company, just that it's not a good investment for my purposes."

"And you're OK with tactics like short selling?"

"As was explained to me, people dislike short-sellers as much as they dislike people who play the Don't Pass line at a craps table. Betting against a company or betting against the player with the dice makes you unpopular, but if you're right, it makes you a lot of money when everyone else bets wrong."

"I think short selling should be illegal! You're selling something you don't own!"

"And yet, you deliver the thing you've sold," I replied. "OK, it's possible to execute what's called a 'naked short', but that's extremely risky, because it can result in what's called 'failure to deliver' which unwinds the transaction, costs you money, and worse, costs you your reputation. I won't execute a naked short, so I would have possession of the shares I'm selling."

"That's not how I understand it."

"It's semantics. You said I didn't own the shares, and you were right. I said I did deliver the thing I had sold, and I was right. It's done by borrowing the shares from someone with a promise to replace them and paying them a fee. In a sense, it's no different from buying a car or house with borrowed money."

"How so?"

"You pay for the house or car in full with money that isn't yours, based on a promise to repay it, along with a fee, which we call interest. If I short a stock, I borrow the stock to sell, and pay the owner back with shares plus a fee. The objection most people have to it is that you are betting the stock price will go down, and that offends people the same way betting Don't Pass offends gamblers at the craps table."

"So, how does it work?"

"The same as selling any stock. I sell it, then deliver the shares within a specified time, usually three business days. There is one key difference with order execution, though. A long sale, that is, of stock you own, can be made at any time, at market. A short sale requires that the price go up before it can be executed. That's a rule in place from the 1930s to prevent a dog pile on a stock that is continually moving downward. Other than that, from the standpoint of the person buying the shares from me, there is no difference."

"So, how do you return those shares?"

"You buy new ones on the open market. In the same way a twenty-dollar bill in your pocket is no different from any other twenty-dollar bill in terms of being able to spend it, shares of stock of the same class in the same company are identical. Do you see where the risk lies?"

"No."

"If the stock goes up, I lose money. And there is basically no limit to how much I can lose, because I owe those shares to the person I borrowed them from and have to return them according to the agreement we made. So, let's say I think IBM's share price is going to go down. I borrow 100,000 shares from someone who is holding it for dividends, meaning they have no plan to sell anytime soon. We agree that they'll lend me those shares at 5% plus the value of the dividend, if the loan extends past the ex-dividend date. If the price drops below $95, I make money. If it doesn't, I lose money. If it goes up significantly, I can lose unlimited amounts of money."