Lanna L. Pai

Between May 18 and June 7, 2001, Pai sold 338,897 shares of Enron stock and exercised Enron stock options that put another 572,818 shares on the open market. At the time, the price averaged $53.78 per share. This early sell-off of Enron stock had the benefit of shielding Pai from the insider trading charges leveled against other Enron executives who had also secretly sold off large amounts of stock before the company’s ruinous finances were publicly known.Lou Lung Pai (Chinese: 白露龍; pinyin: Bái Lòulóng) (born 23 June 1947) is a Chinese-American businessman and former Enron executive. He was CEO of Enron subsidiaries Enron Energy Services and Enron Xcelerator, a venture capital division. He left Enron with over $250 million. Pai was the second-largest land owner in Colorado after he purchased the 77,500-acre (314 km) Taylor Ranch for $23 million in 1999, though he sold the property in June 2004 for $60 million. Pai was a founder and is a former chairman of Element Markets, a renewable-energy consulting firm. Through Element, Pai has invested in pollution emissions credits. Since then, Pai has emerged as a partner in Midstream Capital Partners LLC. Pai joined Enron in 1987, when it was just a regional energy supplier. He became one of (eventual) CEO Jeffrey Skilling’s top lieutenants, primarily tasked with detailing and implementing Skilling’s vision of transforming Enron into a de facto energy commodities-trading firm. During his Enron career, Skilling put Pai in charge of multiple Enron subsidiaries. Pai was CEO of the EES (Enron Energy Services) subsidiary from March 1997 until May 2001. The reasons for his resignation from Enron remain shrouded in mystery.

On July 30, 2008, Pai agreed to resolve civil insider trading charges against him with an out-of-court settlement of $31.5 million, including $1.5 million in civil fines and $30 million in restitution, to be deposited into a fund for shareholders harmed by Enron’s bankruptcy. He continues to neither admit nor deny the Securities and Exchange Commission claims that he sold millions of shares of Enron stock based on non-public information about the company’s financial problems. It is one of the largest settlements in the history of the SEC’s enforcement program dealing with an individual for alleged insider trading. As part of the settlement, Pai was also barred from serving as an officer or director of a public company for five years.Pai was born in Nanjing, China and came to the United States at the age of two. Pai obtained both his B.S. and M.S. in economics from the University of Maryland, College Park, where his father, Shih-I Pai, was an aeronautics professor. Pai worked for the federal government in the 1970s before joining Enron.

Despite a reputation for being extremely introverted, taciturn, and reclusive around the office, Pai also came to symbolize the legendary lavishness and excesses of Enron’s corporate culture. Though married, Pai was known to spend inordinate amounts of time during and after working hours in Houston-area strip clubs, use the Enron corporate jet for personal commuting, and charge several hundred dollars worth of lunches for himself and accompanying staff to the corporate expense account until Chairman Ken Lay later prohibited it.

Accounts of the Enron scandal have frequently portrayed him as a mysterious figure; a former Enron employee, interviewed in the 2005 documentary film Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, referred to Pai as “the invisible CEO”.

Pai’s frequent strip club visits during his time with Enron led to an affair with stripper Melanie Fewell (who was also married), and resulted in a pregnancy. Upon learning of the affair, Pai’s then-wife of over 20 years, Lanna Lee, with whom he has two biological children, filed for divorce. To satisfy the financial terms of his divorce settlement, Pai cashed out approximately $250 million of his Enron stock just months before the company’s stock price dramatically collapsed and it filed for bankruptcy protection. After the divorce, Pai and Fewell married.3. The “Best Price Guarantee” does not apply to reservations offering third-party loyalty program rewards (e.g PointsMAX) or unpublished rates, such as: \n\t\tAs a traveler, you have the responsibility to follow government advice, enforce personal hygiene measures, and apply social and physical distancing during your stay. Agoda encourages you to engage in safe travel in a responsible manner and to remain vigilant to changing conditions.\n\t 4. Agoda has the right and discretion to determine the validity of any claim, including but not limited to, determining that it is for the same hotel, room type, dates, and that it meets all Terms, Conditions, and Claims processing requirements.

Agoda offers the following “Best Price Guarantee”. If you have reserved a hotel room through Agoda and then show us that you could book the same room for the same dates at a lower rate that is viewable and bookable on another website, we will either match that rate or beat it.

To help our travelers make informed and safe travel decisions, Agoda has initiated Hygiene Plus. Our partners listed under this campaign are committed to providing a clean environment to guests and staff by enhancing safety and hygiene measures. These partners have confirmed their compliance with specific safety and hygiene measures and can update their list at any time – providing you with up-to-date information to help you make the most informed choice.

\n\t\tNeither the Hygiene Plus badge nor any amenities-related information displayed on Agoda is a guarantee from Agoda that an accommodation is risk-free or that risk has been controlled to a certain level. On their initiative, each property simply self-declares to potential guests that the property has put in place certain amenities, as listed on its Agoda property page. Agoda does not verify or certify such self-declarations. \n\tOn the other hand, can you imagine a bizarro-world reality where instead of taking money from you, a stripper actually ended up saving you a bunch of money? And not a few hundred dollars, not a few thousand, not a few million, but HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars???In order to pay the costly financial terms of his divorce settlement, Lou Pai was forced to cash out 100% of his Enron stock. During a three week period between May 18 and June 7 of 2001, Lou sold off every single share he had ever been granted. He also exercised several hundred thousand Enron options. It was probably hard to do because at the time, Enron was absolutely kicking ass as a company and as a stock. Enron’s all time highest price was $90.56 a share in August 2000. The average price Lou Pai got for his holdings between May and June of 2001 was $72 a share. The total value Lou Pai was left with after every share was sold? $280 million.

When times were good, Lou Pai also had a reputation for enjoying the Houston-area strip clubs. Actually, Lou Pai’s penchant for strip clubs wasn’t a reputation, it was a legend. According to Bethany McLean’s amazing book on the rise and fall of Enron titled “The Smartest Guys in the Room”: When you put it all together, Lou Pai is one of the luckiest people on the planet. By getting his stripper girlfriend pregnant, he was forced to sell off every single share of Enron he ever owned. He walked away just below the peak of Enron’s stock price with an estimated… His only real consequence came in 2008 when he agreed in an out of court settlement to pay $31.5 million in civil fines and restitution to Enron’s investors. He admitted no wrong doing and never spent a moment in handcuffs. As part of the settlement, Lou Pai was barred from serving as an officer of a public company for five years. Lou would reportedly visit a particular Houston strip club (located not far from Enron’s world headquarters) every night after work. He would conduct meetings at the strip club and treat the top performing salesman with wild back room parties that were all funded by his Enron corporate expense account. As legend has it, the strippers didn’t believe such a mild mannered, almost meek, person was actually a powerful energy CEO. So how did Lou prove his identity? He allegedly would bring the strippers up to lavish Enron offices where they would continue the party late into the night. In order to avoid getting caught by his wife, on his way home Lou would stop by a gas station and splash a little bit of gasoline on himself to get rid of the stripper scent. Lou’s ex wife Lanna L. Pai, with whom he had two children, was paid an undisclosed lump sum that is believed to be in the tens of millions. She also was granted the right to the couple’s Houston mansion, a Houston condo and a $3 million house in Hawaii.

Unfortunately, the implementation of EES’ ambitious goals turned out to be a huge disaster. Between 1997 and 2001, EES blew through $500 million in operating expenses without ever generating any significant revenues. Between all of the various subsidiaries of Enron that Lou Pai ran, his tenure resulted in over $1 billion in losses.The only other person who can probably relate is Mikhail Prokhorov, the Russian billionaire and Brooklyn Nets owner who pretty much owes his entire $10 billion dollar fortune to a private jet full of prostitutes. I bet those guys would get along very well.

A few months back I went to a strip club for a bachelor party. When I walked in, I had about $100 cash in my wallet. When I walked out, not only was all my cash gone, but the only thing left in my wallet was an ATM receipt for the additional $60 I withdrew while inside the club (with a $5 strip club ATM fee). Why did this happen? Because strippers are absolute Zen masters when it comes to extracting money from men. It’s what they were put on this planet to do. Not long after Lou fled to Colorado, Enron slowly started to collapse as investors began to question the company’s accounting practices and general business ethics. You know how Lou Pai was able to sell off his entire stake in Enron at an average price of $72 a share? That was June of 2001. Two months later, on August 15, 2001, Enron’s share price sunk to $42. Two months later, in October, Enron dropped to $15. At this point, Enron’s top executives like Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling were quietly unloading massive amounts of their personal shares while simultaneously telling their own employees and outside investors that this was a GREAT time to buy more stock because Enron was sure to rebound imminently. Ken Lay sold off $90 million worth of stock during this period. In March of 1997, Lou was named CEO of a subsidiary called Enron Energy Services (EES). The goal of EES was to sell gas and electricity directly to personal homes and businesses a market prices. Think of it like this: Right now the amount you pay for gas or electricity is a fairly fixed rate that is set by a utility company that is probably a pseudo-government entity. EES wanted to create an alternative private sector option that allowed consumers to buy energy on the free market, direct from a utility. EES spent a small fortune on advertisements around the country attempting to sell people on the idea of buying all their energy directly in one place. By consolidating the market and allowing people to buy energy on an open market, EES promised to save its users 5-15% a year on their energy needs.But before shit hit the fan for both EES and Enron, Lou Pai was one of the most important and highest paid people at the company. During his tenure as CEO, Lou earned approximately $100 million in salary alone. He also received enormous grants of valuable Enron stock.

Lou Pai was born in Nanjing, China in 1946 and moved to the United States with his family at the age of two. His father was a math professor at the University of Maryland, Collage Park, where Lou would eventually earn both a B.S. and a M.S. degree in economics. In his college years, Lou was considered a mathematical genius. He joined Enron in 1987 and quickly climbed the ranks. At the time Lou joined Enron, the company was still a mid-sized, regional energy supplier. Within a decade, both Enron and Lou Pai were rising stars. Lou eventually became one of Enron CEO Jeff Skilling’s most trusted and highest ranking executives.At this point, Lou Pai must have felt like he woke up in a nightmare. No more high paying job, his stripper girlfriend was pregnant, his marriage was destroyed and divorce proceedings were underway. Was Karma catching up? Well, considering what happened next, I don’t really think you can believe Karma had any impact on Lou Pai.Meanwhile, Lou married his stripper girlfriend, now known as Melanie Miller Pai. Together, with their newborn child, the couple moved to Colorado where Lou became the second largest land holder in the entire state after purchasing a 120 square mile ranch in the Sangre de Cristo mountain range.

In the unlikely event that you find your item cheaper at another online store, just let us know and we’ll beat the competitor’s pricing hands-down. Conditions apply, please refer to our Price Match Page for more information.Returns are easy, simply contact us at [email protected] and one of our helpful staff will assist you with return instructions. All damages and defects will be replaced. Other restrictions apply, please refer to our Shipping & Returns page for more information.

We insist that you will love everything you buy from us. If you’re unhappy for any reason whatsoever, just let us know and we’ll bend over backwards to make things right again.In stock orders typically ship in 2-4 days. Shipped orders generally arrive in 7-14 business days. Larger items ship via LTL (truck) you will be contacted to schedule a delivery appointment. LTL orders may take slightly longer to arrive. Please refer to our Shipping & Returns page for more information.Inject a little modern appeal into your living space with this remarkable Pai Lounge Chair. An interesting addition to any room, this chair boasting a sleek solid chrome steel frame. The curvy, bowl-style seat and back feature grid-pattern wire that lends geometric flair and is sure to catch the eye. The seat of the Pai boasts a leatherette pad that assures comfortable and supportive seating. With plastic, non-marking feet, this accent chair looks great and perform perfectly on any type of flooring.Pferde- und Lagerfeuerromantik, aufregende Berg- und Dschungellandschaften mit faszinierenden Wildnisklängen, entlegene Höhlen und Wasserfälle, unberührte Natur, heiße Quellen zum Gesund-Baden, die beeindruckende und fremdartige Lebensweise der Nomadenstämme hautnah und familiär erleben.

Lou Lung Pai (Chinese: 白露龍; pinyin: Bái Lòulóng) born in Nanjing, China in 1947, is a Chinese-American businessman and former Enron executive. He was CEO of Enron Energy Services from March 1997 until January 2001 and CEO of Enron Xcelerator, a venture capital division of Enron, from February 2001 until June 2001. He left Enron with over $280 million. Pai was the second largest land owner in Colorado after he purchased the 77,500-acre (314 km) Taylor Ranch for US$23 million in 1999, though he sold the property in June 2004 for US$60 million.Accounts of the Enron scandal have frequently portrayed him as a mysterious figure; a former Enron employee, interviewed in the documentary film Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room, referred to Pai as “the invisible CEO”. Pai’s frequent strip club visits during his time with Enron led to an affair with stripper Melanie Fewell (who was married, herself), and resulted in a pregnancy. Upon learning of the affair, Pai’s then-wife of over 20 years, Lanna, with whom he has two biological children, filed for divorce. To satisfy the financial terms of his divorce settlement, Pai cashed-out approximately $250 million of his Enron stock – just months before the company’s stock price dramatically collapsed, and it filed for bankruptcy protection. After the divorce, Pai and Fewell married. Pai was born in Nanjing, China and came to the United States at the age of two. Pai obtained both his B.S. and M.S. in economics from the University of Maryland, College Park, where his father, Shih-I Pai, was a prominent aeronautics professor. Pai worked for the federal government in the 1970s before joining Enron.Pai joined Enron in 1987, when it was still just a regional energy supplier. He became one of (eventual) CEO Jeffrey Skilling’s top lieutenants, primarily tasked with detailing and implementing Skilling’s vision of transforming Enron into a de facto energy-commodities-trading firm. During his Enron career, Skilling put Pai in charge of multiple Enron subsidiaries; Pai was CEO of the EES (Enron Energy Services) subsidiary from March 1997, until May 2001. The reasons for his resignation from Enron remain shrouded in mystery.

Lou Pai has not been charged with any criminal wrongdoing in the Enron scandal and has exercised his 5th Amendment right in regard to the subsequent Enron class action. However, as a result of the lawsuit, Pai forfeited $6 million due to him from Enron’s insurance policy for company officers to a fund for Enron shareholders.Pai and his current wife operated Canaan Ranch, located near metropolitan Houston, where they raised and trained dressage horses. They later moved from Sugarland, Texas, to Middleburg, Virginia, and opened a second Canaan Ranch there, but as of 2014, it is up for sale. More recently, Pai and his family have moved to Wellington, Florida.

Despite a reputation for being extremely introverted, taciturn, and reclusive around the office, Pai also came to symbolize the legendary lavishness and excesses of Enron’s corporate culture. Though married, Pai was known to: spend inordinate amounts of time during and after working hours in Houston-area strip clubs; use the Enron corporate jet for personal commuting; and, charge several-hundred dollars worth of lunches for himself and accompanying staff to the corporate expense account (until Chairman Ken Lay later prohibited it). She said he was unaware of the web of limited partnerships that obscured Enron’s debts, did not sell his stocks because of any knowledge that the company was doomed, and saw no evidence of any accounting tricks designed to hide the failure of the divisions he founded. If Pai had held on to the stock in Enron, of which his inventions were an integral part, he would not be a prominent target in the many pending lawsuits.Pai’s wealth and good works glitter even more in light of what happened to his biggest Enron projects: Enron Energy Services, which managed the energy use of national chains, such as J.C. Penney and Harrah’s Entertainment casinos; and a spinoff called NewPower, which competes with utility companies in the retail electricity market. National news reports have mentioned the love affair. Confronted by an ABC News television crew, he was asked how he felt about making so much money amid Enron’s decline. Pai’s possessions stand out, too: a Colorado wilderness ranch that covers 120 square miles of the Sangre de Cristo mountain range, a Texas horse-breeding facility, a New Mexico outdoor academy where young men recover from drug abuse and other personal problems, and an upscale house in Sugar Land near the one owned by J. Clifford Baxter, the former Enron executive who committed suicide recently.The sales came while he was divorcing Lanna L. Pai, 50, mother of their two children. The settlement required him to sell much of his stock and split some of the proceeds. Almost all of the stock Pai sold was priced at more than $72 per share. When he sold what was left over in 2001, the price was down to $50 a share. Six months later, the company was bankrupt and shares were below $1. Those amounts are small compared to the sums he cashed out in 2000 and 2001, but they do leave Pai among the ranks of investors stung by the Enron legacy. “He never worked on the financial side,” the lawyer said, referring to the accounting and partnerships at the heart of Enron’s troubles. “He has no training or experience in it.” Without the scandalous divorce that forced him to dump Enron stock, Lou L. Pai might still be the most important former Enron executive you’ve never heard of.

He earned what he was paid by developing business ideas, Jeffrey said, and he quit in 2001 as head of Enron Xcelerator, a now-defunct operation, because his responsibility of “incubating” business ventures was transferred to others, and that meant it was time for him to take his ideas elsewhere.She now owns a $3 million house in Hawaii and a $1 million Houston condominium in the same luxury high-rise as Lay, according to government records. She did not return a call from the Houston Chronicle.

Pai’s lawyer said Ceconi was describing alleged actions that took place after Pai transferred from EES near the end of 2000. But Sutherland, the former EES worker, said Pai continued to help with EES matters from his perch at Enron Xcelerator. He was never mentioned in the Powers report, the internal Enron probe that partially blamed Enron’s downfall on executives, the board of directors, auditors and others. And, like the other Enron executives, he has not been charged with a crime. Pai’s lawyer, Deborah J. Jeffrey of Washington, D.C., who specializes in defending people accused of white-collar crimes, filled in some of the blanks.But NewPower, which Pai headed until September, lost much more. Problems with electricity deregulation in California slowed down similar efforts in other states, shrinking the expected market for all such retailers. Beyond those issues, however, some NewPower investors charge in a lawsuit against Pai and others that the company, which was tied into the controversial Enron partnerships, hid some fatal financial problems. Pai’s lawyer said he was unaware of any wrongdoing at NewPower.

But he got to the top of the stock sale list mostly because of the shares he sold in the first half of 2000, after buying them at the option price, a deep discount rewarded to company executives.On the list of executives who collectively cashed in $1.1 billion worth of shares, Enron’s top former officer, Ken Lay, ranks second. In first is Pai, at $268 million, roughly a fourth of the total.

Three weeks before she was laid off as an EES financial expert, Margaret Ceconi told Lay in an August memo that the business unit posted a profit only by moving $500 million in losses to another, truly profitable Enron division. An Enron spokesman declined to discuss the allegation. The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Ceconi’s statements.”He had no fiscal abilities at all,” said Sutherland, the former EES employee who worked for Pai. “It amazed so many people that it took them as long as it did to pull the reins from him. He had no appetite for it.”That woman now is Pai’s second wife, Melanie Miller Pai. She runs the Texas horse facility, Canaan Ranch in Fulshear, where one of the horses is named Pay-N-Go.

The relationship was undeniable, partly because of the intimate words they spoke on a voice-mail message that somehow was transferred from Pai’s Enron telephone to the message box of several workers, according to laid-off EES analyst Rudy Sutherland.

Current employment is stated as Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations. The residency of Lanna is at 2725 Stinson Driv, Fort Wayne, IN 46816-4066. Richard A Lee is also associated with this address. One phone number is associated with Lanna: (260) 447-6839 (Frontier North, Inc). Richard E Levihn, Beverly S Jordan were identified as possible owners of the phone number (260) 447-6839

Lanna lives at 2015 61st Strt, NY 11204-2406 at present. Seven persons linked to this address. Their name are Diana Lee, James Lee, and five others. (718) 256-0020 (Verizon New York, Inc) is the number currently linked to Lanna. Yong Chen, Wun Lee, James Lee, Lan Lee, Samantha Lee, Diana Lee were identified as possible owners of the phone number (718) 256-0020

Lanna was born on 1952-01-22. Lanna’s age is about 71. Lanna Lin M Pai, Lanna L Leelou, Lou Lanna L Lee, Lou Lee, Lanna Lee, Lanna Pai, Lanna Lin Lee, Lanna P Lee, Lan Na Lee, Lanna Lin-Mei Lee, Lanna Lin-Mei Pai are substitutes that Lanna can choose to use. Residents of 4224 Marquette Strt, Houston, TX 77005-3543 include Lanna. Evelynda M Sta Romana, Evelynd Staromana, and two other persons are also associated with this address. Lanna’s previous addresses include 12 Shady Grove Ln, Houston, TX 77024. Lanna has lived in four different cities, including Houston, TX and Silver Spring, MD. Robert Rosenberg, Meiching Yau, Janet H Blocker are two of six people who may know Lanna due to residence history. The phone numbers associated with Lanna: (713) 562-1532 (New Cingular Wireless Pcs, LLC), (713) 533-9536 (Southwestern BellNew Cingular Wireless Pcs, LLC). There is a chance that the phone number (713) 562-1532 is shared by Luis Guerrero, Luis F Guerrero. The phone number (713) 973-8645 is also used by Lanna Lin-mei Pai, Brian Pai. Public records show that the phone number (713) 630-0744 is linked to Linda P Lay, Kenneth L Lay, Linda Phillips Lay. The one possible email address for Lanna is [email protected]

Lanna is a resident at 5684 Bay Str, Emeryville, CA 94608. The list of three companies that are registered to this address includes Wideumbrella LLC and The N E Moore Group Company. We assume that Marilou Ecat and Lauren Sondel were among 145 dwellers or residents at this place. The only phone number that Lanna owns is (917) 992-2051 (Cellco Partnership)

Lanna has done High School and graduated. The birth date was listed as 31-01-1947. Lanna was born seventy-six years ago. Lanna lives at 6431 Grayback Drv, North Las Vegas, NV 89084-2814 at present. This address is also associated with the name of Gary Batchelder, Gerry G Guzman, and three other individuals. (702) 586-6717 (Cox Nevada Telcom, LLC), (702) 487-5769 are phone numbers that belong to Lanna. Brenda Joyce Lewis, Dennis Lee, Sarah Lee were identified as possible owners of the phone number (702) 586-6717. Four persons, including Danielle A Lee, Matthew A Lee, Sarah Lee, Dennis Lee, listed the phone number (702) 487-5769 as their own, various documents indicatedResidents of 1020 Carmel Shores Drv, Las Vegas, NV 89128-2011 include Lanna. Associated persons to this address are Brent T Flygar and Mark D Lee. Records show that Lanna can be contacted at (702) 363-4323 (Central Tel Co)

Hasson also failed to respond appropriately to Lee’s concerns. At a meeting with Hasson and Bailes on May 19, 2000, Lee expressed concerns about a temporary restraining order or “asset freeze.” Hasson discussed what he described as the “shenanigans” of the judge presiding over the divorce and suggested the judge had “a history” of freezing marital assets in divorce cases. Although Hasson admitted at trial that he does not know the legal requirements to obtain a restraining order, he did not suggest that Lee contact an attorney who could address those concerns. Nevertheless, in the same meeting, Hasson arranged for a law firm to prepare documents establishing a family limited partnership in which B. Lanna, Inc. would be a partner. These documents listed Hasson as a 10% owner of B. Lanna, Inc., although there is no evidence in the record that, at the time these documents were requested or prepared, Lee agreed that Hasson would own 10% of the corporation. A fair-minded jury could not disregard this evidence that Hasson did not make reasonable use of the confidence Lee placed in him.In addition to the issues of compensation previously discussed, the record contains further evidence that Hasson used his position to benefit at Lee’s expense. For example, during the course of his agreement with Lee, Hasson applied for additional life insurance on his own behalf. In connection with this application, Hasson was required to provide information regarding his net worth. Bailes provided the information, and, incorrectly assuming that Hasson was seeking “key man” insurance benefitting B. Lanna, Inc., Bailes billed the work to B. Lanna, Inc. Lee eventually paid the bill. Because work solely benefitting Hasson was billed to B. Lanna, Inc. and paid by Lee, Hasson directly benefitted at Lee’s expense; however, there is no evidence that Hasson reimbursed Lee or the corporation or even disclosed these practices to Lee. See City of Keller, 168 S.W.3d at 810-11 (noting that reviewing courts do not disregard contrary evidence if there is no favorable evidence or conclusively establishes the opposite of the fact the jury was asked to find). Moreover, the evidence shows a pattern in which work requested by Hasson was billed to B. Lanna, Inc. and paid by Lee. In April of 2000, Hasson traveled with Lee to Hawaii, where Lee was interested in buying property. Hasson acted as a liaison between Lee and her banker, real estate attorney, real estate agent, and title company. Hasson also sought advice from Bailes about the tax consequences if Lee were to buy a house in Hawaii for $12 million and sell it to Hasson for $7 million. Bailes advised Hasson that Lee would not be able to deduct the loss as a legitimate business expense. Although Hasson requested this information, Bailes billed B. Lanna, Inc. for this work, and again, Lee eventually paid the bill.

Mere subjective trust does not transform an arm’s-length transaction into a fiduciary relationship. Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Morris, 981 S.W.2d 667, 674 (Tex.1998). Rather, in order to establish the existence of an informal fiduciary relationship, the record must show that one of the parties relied on the other “for moral, financial, or personal support or guidance.” Trostle v. Trostle, 77 S.W.3d 908, 915 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2002, no pet.). The length of the relationship is another important factor in determining whether a fiduciary relationship should be recognized. Chien, 759 S.W.2d at 494 n. 6 (citing Harris v. Sentry Title Co., Inc., 715 F.2d 941 (5th Cir.1983)); Kalb v. Norsworthy, 428 S.W.2d 701, 705 (Tex.Civ.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1968, no writ) (finding a fiduciary relationship where, “By reason of appellant’s long association with appellee in a business relationship, as well as the close personal friendship existing between them, appellant was justified in placing confidence in the belief that appellee would act in his best interest.”). But even a longstanding relationship of friendship or cordiality is insufficient, without more, to establish an informal fiduciary relationship. See Meyer v. Cathey, 167 S.W.3d 327, 331 (Tex.2005) (holding that no fiduciary relationship existed where the record showed that, although the parties were friends and frequent dining partners, their prior projects together were arm’s-length transactions governed by agreements that expressly disavowed the creation of any fiduciary duty); Atrium Boutique v. Dallas Mkt. Ctr. Co., 696 S.W.2d 197, 199-200 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1985, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (holding that the trial court properly disregarded a jury finding that appellant Bayoud shared a confidential relationship with appellee Crow where the record reflected only that their families had been socially acquainted for twenty-two years and shared a “friendly, respectful relationship,” but that Bayoud was never guided by Crow). On the other hand, a close personal family relationship can give rise to a fiduciary relationship. Holland v. Lesesne, 350 S.W.2d 859, 862 (Tex.Civ.App.-San Antonio 1961, writ ref’d n.r.e.) (affirming finding of a confidential relationship where the evidence showed an “unusually close personal friendly and confidential relationship” between the parties and their families in which the families visited each other regularly, dined together, and vacationed together).

to the extent that [Lee] was paying valid business, investment or personal expenses, she might have a shot at having that come out of the community assets. [Lee] then detailed the expenses that were going to be paid and mentioned she owed [Hasson] some money for his services. I jokingly asked how much, $10,000? After laughing, [Lee] outlined to me her deal with [Hasson]: [Hasson] will get a fee equal to 10% of the fair market value of what she recovers in the divorce settlement with [Pai]. Since she has already recovered $40,000,000, she owes him $4,000,000 currently, and will owe him 10% of whatever assets she receives in the future as a result of the divorce. To maximize the potential tax deduction to [Lee], I suggested all these expenses be paid by B. Lanna, Inc. and․ I recommended [Hasson’s] fee be paid to his corporation.

During his first month of employment, Hasson helped Lee obtain a mortgage loan and line of credit; however, as Hasson conceded at trial, Pai already had arranged such financing before Hasson’s involvement. At trial, Hasson testified that he did not know whether the terms of the loan he arranged were better or worse than the terms of the loan arranged by Pai; however, the loan arranged by Hasson included a payment of $120,000 to Hasson’s company, Diversified Financial Enterprises. Lee also gave Hasson a check for $100,000 for earnest money for a house she considered buying. According to Lee, “It was Ted’s idea. He told me I should buy a house.” However, the contract for the property identifies Theodore and Theresa Hasson as the buyers. Lee testified she later learned that Hasson put the earnest money check in his bank account and told her the contract fell through. According to Hasson, however, both this check and the $120,000 payment to Diversified Financial Enterprises were advances against the amounts he would be due under his oral agreement with Lee.11. Hasson suggests that Lee waived this argument by failing to “list a challenge to the finding of compliance with fiduciary duty in her issues presented.” However, Lee has challenged the trial court’s ruling disregarding the jury’s finding that a confidential relationship existed, and in a subsidiary argument, explicitly argues, “The JNOV error is harmful because there is no evidence-and the trial court agreed on the record that there is no evidence-that Hasson complied with that duty.” This argument was sufficiently briefed, and we hold that appellants’ statement of the issues, their treatment of subsidiary questions, and their corresponding statement of facts and argument satisfy the requirements of the appellate briefing rules. See Tex.R.App. P. 38.1(e)-(h).

19. This failure also demonstrates (a) Hasson’s absence of the utmost good faith, (b) his use of his position to benefit at Lee’s expense, (c) his failure to make reasonable use of Lee’s confidence and to place her interests before his own, and (d) an instance in which Hasson’s self-interest conflicted with his obligations as a fiduciary.After reviewing the record in the light most favorable to the jury’s finding, crediting favorable evidence if reasonable jurors could and disregarding contrary evidence unless reasonable jurors could not, we conclude that a reasonable jury could not have found that Hasson fully and fairly disclosed all important information concerning the transactions at issue to Lee.

In January 1998, Lee discovered that Pai had been having an extra-marital affair and had another child outside of their marriage. She confided her discoveries to the Hassons. Pai moved out of the family home in 1999, and Lee interviewed various family law attorneys, including Lawrence Rothenberg. Lee’s sister, who is also an attorney, accompanied Lee to some of these interviews. On June 15, 1999, attorney J.D. Bucky Allshouse filed a petition for divorce on Lee’s behalf; however, Lee withdrew the suit ten days later.

d) Ted Hasson placed the interests of Lanna Lee before his own, did not use the advantage of his position to gain any benefit for himself at the expense of Lanna Lee, and did not place himself in any position where his self-interest might conflict with his obligations as a fiduciary; and

Hasson does not dispute that there is no evidence in the record that Lee received the benefit of independent advice regarding her agreement with Hasson. Rather, Hasson testified at trial that Lee refused to obtain independent advice because she chose to keep their agreement secret:I remember sort of disengaging a little bit from that news. This was not good news, as you’ve heard, about the family relationships and, of course, at this point in time I had also started a business relationship with Lou and Lanna, so this was not good news for the Hasson family or for my business with them.

We discussed whether or not [Lee] should withdraw the money from the joint account [with Pai] and put it into her account. I suggested that she call her attorney Donn Fullenwilder [sic], to get his input. Ted said that wasn’t a good idea because Donn was going to charge her $7,000,000 to get her 50% of the community estate.5 Recognizing that [Lee] was going to get this money sooner or later, it was agreed that she would not invade the [joint account] unless the settlement negotiations broke down.Bailes testified that a few days later, Lee contacted him in an effort to reach Hasson, and Bailes told Lee that Hasson was on vacation. Lee and her daughter then joined the Hassons on vacation in early June. According to Lee, she asked Hasson to return the $4 million. Lee returned from the vacation a week or so before Hasson.

8. See Tex.R. Civ. P. 324(c) (“When judgment is rendered non obstante veredicto or notwithstanding the findings of a jury on one or more questions, the appellee may bring forward by cross-point ․ any ground which would have vitiated the verdict ․ including although not limited to the ground that one or more of the jury’s findings have insufficient support in the evidence or are against the overwhelming preponderance of the evidence as a matter of fact․”). Q: You understand that you’re [sic] representation to Ms. Lee that she would be able to deduct any fees of any kind associated with getting a divorce from her income taxes, that was incorrect. You know that, don’t you? Finally, Lee relied on Hasson for personal guidance and support in areas as important to her as achieving reconciliation in her marriage. For example, it is undisputed that Lee initially did not want a divorce. She instead relied on Hasson’s advice in joining with him to purchase a boat for Pai in the hope that the gift would help to effect a reconciliation: