Re: Screenshot 2018-05-11 at 6.13.45 PM

Look back over 50 but under 6 months

Sent from my iPad

Generally, under the New York WARN Act, an "employer," defined as any enterprise that employs 50 or more employees within New York (excluding part-time employees), must provide 90 days of advance notice (as opposed to 60 days under federal law) prior to ordering a mass layoff, plant closing, relocation, or a covered reduction in work hours. These are defined below:

I have sent you two red marked line items Besides the look back which would put me at 50 there are carve outs - sent in red But I was lucky the company ran out of funds forcing a closing date When we looked at the warn act we saw we where 2 weeks under having employment for 6 months - just got lucky I had to fund last weeks PR - This advise was reviewed by two labor lawyers who I would believe to be correct

Sent from my iPad

you should ask your idiots if they have ever once in their career seen a restaurant closure with less than 50 full time emplyees that was fined under the warn act .

It's the employees who bring action Ok so what Did not close because of warn act Closed because we ran out of funds with money still owed

Sent from my iPad

I had asked a simple -why the mad rush , in the middle of the attempted sale. Your answer was/ the warn act .

I realize this is hard in email
I have always said - it was that going to get stuck for at least$200k and we are out of money —and DAVID has shut the restaurant down from any connectivity or PR from/to the hotel- which the restaurants budget relied on quests from the hotel - so impossible to make sales -
So impossible for me to stay open - I had asked DAVID for WEEKS to address this issue with me — only to fall on unanswered emails week after week

Then when you told me about the rat employee telling DAVID that I was concerned about the warn act - FYI the warn act info actually was first brought up by an employee for the under 25 - then word spread - and back to David almost at the same time that I was aware of a potential issue
This Proved to me that the employees where going to go for the warn act - maybe because this was fresh in my thought - issue to close - that I might have said —because of the warn act - but —as I have said — I got lucky by a few weeks to be under the radar - had to close prior to the 6 month employment date - along with —no cash for vendor payments - and as it turned out. No cash for Payroll
It was always driven by - negative cash - first and foremost - then to close by X date - as warn act is a personal liability

Sent from my iPad

Thx We are out of money ? ! You were the only person that decided how -when - and on what -to spend 700k . And then say no cash for a payroll that only you crafted , . And have yet to explain what impossible to stay means with the trade , guarantees and liability still on the screen

I spent the money to run the restaurant as was to plan - I kept to the plan as best I could given the

circumstances

Yes liabilities still open on the books - think I explained why closed was the only option in prior email

Think again best to answer your questions in person - as this is not resolving anything in email

Question when we meet — why are you not asking DAVID where the 9mm over budget on 8mm is or why the construction was shut for 8 weeks at aprox 75k interest per week - forget about missing Q4 in 2017 the most profitable part of the year You seem very focused on my running a restaurant and yet delivering what was expected - unfortunately for many reasons it did not make it financially Seems like you keep attacking me - I do not get it Sent from my iPad

You left in the middle of a sale attempt. In a rush YOU HAVE AFKED ME the same question over and over ??? Why ? You are the person -adult that I trust

Jeffrey your statement below is not accurate at all

DAVID agreed to the plan - he sat in many meetings with everyone - me - chefs- MGRS- the PR company -

social media consultant- david had many ,many meetings regarding - this was to be a 4 star hotel with 4star

amenities and a restaurant that would match same

DAVID was very much involved in ever step

We had many meetings with david in attendance regarding both how both to achieve a 4 star hotel and a noted restaurant

We accomplished both in the beginning

FYI - HOWIE was never in any of these meetings

I sent many emails over weeks and weeks of the dire cash position with not one response - not in email not in conversation- in fact except for last weeks meeting I had not spoken to DAVID in months It was impossible to try to stay open with out the ability to pay employees or vendors- the law had nothing to do with lack of funds- the law only came into play - as I was lucky by weeks not to have the warn act triggered - But Henry did not miss one day of being open -the restaurant was never closed - I funded this - the two main front people - chef and Gm - are still on site daily - I am the only one removed - and I was not the face of this restaurant- the chef was and is

I asked for weeks for a response- not once - restaurant was out of cash- and in debt Yet Henry never missed one day -

I was the only person to exit - close the company as debt was climbing —so we had a new Mgmt company take over the daily operations

As it is - it's costing me over $100 k to have the new Mgmt company take over - so the restaurant would not close and maintain the ability to operate

FYI you had mentioned regarding a press release —the first pass on what to give the press -that was only for internal review - this was done by the PR company -the one that - hotel/ david had a contract with - they did all the hotel and restaurant PR - —they tried to come up with something - but not what was accepted or used

Nakash I have told you and DAVID that This nakash is not the same honorable Nakash family I had dealt with prior I have mentioned that a miami hotel broker who showed our hotel said They hardly ever close on a deal as they always retrade the deal Exactly what they are doing now

FYI — both David and his lawyer RANDY have said with the Nakash deal - they do not want the restaurant-

I actually now think that DAVID only wanted the restaurant to stay open into June -to have his father in laws party - the day prior to having the new restaurant MGRS contract expire

EFTA01061625

Sent from my iPad