I always maintained my sense of humor throughout the civil (and not so civil) procedural tumultuous emotional years of my lawsuit. Most major players were aware of this because, at one time or another, they were recipients of written communication reflecting that side of me. The attendant parody (which I titled, Meeting Between Larry Drivon and Dick Bridgman, for purposes of this post) is one example among many that I have integrated in their chronological sequence into this website and accordingly throughout the Timeline.1
Larry Drivon and Richard Bridgman (a San Francisco-based attorney) met to discuss Mr. Bridgman’s potential coming-on-board as my successor counsel. Of course, I knew that the subject of and discussion in any such meeting and perhaps the meeting itself was a fantasy. But, for fun, I assume in the parody that Bridgman will take on the case and this lampoon is angled at the humor of it all as I saw it. And so, I sent the attached satire to Larry reflecting my not-so-serious perspective about that ostensible get-together.2
Some of the wording is inside humor between me and Larry. For me to explain would require a whole lot of digging into my lawsuit archives for specifics.3, 4, 5 However, such is not necessary for this post. I think the gist of my particular take on the matter is evident.6
1 The original letter is handwritten. However, the version attached, I typed up on my computer for the purpose of visual clarity and readability. Other than that, I didn’t change anything.
2 I did not send this letter to Richard Bridgman because I hadn’t met him yet. (Good reason, I suppose. Makes sense) And he hadn’t met me. (In the flesh, that is. I’m sure I had a reputation that preceded me) 3 Just one example is the phrase, “too nebulous and broad.” If I recall correctly, this criticism was raised in Defendant counsel’s Answers to the 09/13/84 Interrogatories (as referenced herein), sent to them by Larry on my behalf. 4 The term, “cooperational bullshitting,” was coined by me sometime down the line during Larry Drivon’s stewardship of my case. It came into being as a reflection of my thoughts about what was going on behind the scenes between opposing sides who I knew weren’t really opposing each other. Things appeared very civil when it was my belief and desire to string Haig Berberian and especially his accountant, Peter Jeppson, up by their balls, for they hated my father and me. But the two sides were negotiating (or so I thought) in slow motion (as the wheels of justice usually do) and I was kicked to the side, bum-rushed out, and left in the dark. I was outraged mostly because I was not allowed into the loop of my own lawsuit, joined at the hip as it was, glommed together in some way with what was going on in my father’s legal matter.-There’s the inside story on that one. 5 The phrase, “simple farmer,” I believe Larry once used, referring to himself during his discussion with me regarding why he wanted out. It was bullshit, of course, because his getting out was part of the pre-planned hidden agenda involved in my legal matter. He never intended to stay on. He got out when the gettin’ was good, before it would have been expected of him to take Haig Berberian’s deposition. Had Larry done so, it would have been quite awkward. How can you depose someone who had no clue that he had been the subject of an ongoing legal inquisition, let alone a man sued. 6 Also most probably evident is that I do not speak French or Spanish (or Hawaiian for that matter). Some of the “exquisite culinary cuisine” mentioned are probably not even spelled right. And I am not a gourmet or a connoisseur of fine food nor do I eat in fancy restaurants. (I didn’t know if Mr. Bridgman was, but I made him out to be for purposes of poking fun in the letter) But I did have to call a couple of San Francisco fine-dining establishments to come up with the names of those dishes.