role: user

text: let's delete that one and go with this:


text:
<turn_aborted>
The user interrupted the previous turn on purpose. Any running unified exec processes were terminated. If any tools/commands were aborted, they may have partially executed; verify current state before retrying.
</turn_aborted>


text:
Here is the full letter with the reliance paragraph integrated.

⸻

Hi Sarah,

I want to frame this discussion around a single objective: establishing long-term financial safety and stability in light of the structure of this marriage and my current circumstances.

Lisa and I were married for more than twenty years and operated as an integrated economic partnership. Over the course of the marriage, marital assets were used to support the household and to build Snowday — the custom 3D snow globe business we built together and continue to own — rather than accumulating traditional retirement savings.

Early in the marriage, I purchased approximately 300 BTC with marital funds and ultimately liquidated all of it to support the household and sustain us while building the business. I understand that subsequent appreciation is not the legal issue. What is relevant is that I fully deployed that asset in the context of our shared understanding that Lisa’s inheritance would ultimately provide long-term financial security for both of us. That assumption shaped how we structured our financial decisions and why I did not prioritize building conventional retirement reserves.

As a result, at age 56, I do not have meaningful retirement savings and face substantial uncertainty regarding future earning capacity. I am not seeking to challenge the classification of the trust principal. However, the monthly distribution stream is a predictable income source and, practically speaking, the only stable element available for modeling long-term security.

My goal is not to pursue a punitive result. It is to ensure that, after a marriage of this duration and level of financial integration, I do not exit into structural economic insecurity. I am asking that we design a framework — whether percentage-based or otherwise — that provides a durable and enforceable income floor sufficient to ensure long-term stability.

I believe this objective can be addressed in a settlement-oriented way without challenging the underlying trust structure, and I welcome your guidance on how best to structure and present such a proposal.

Thank you,
Karl


role: assistant

text: Deleted `records/lawyers/templates/pitch_long_term_support_30pct_clean_rewrite_verbatim_2026-02-26.md` and replaced `records/lawyers/templates/pitch_long_term_support_30pct.md` with your new “Hi Sarah” letter (committed).


text:
remove this line:

— whether percentage-based or
        otherwise —


text: Removed that clause from `records/lawyers/templates/pitch_long_term_support_30pct.md` and committed (`ad42674`).


text: rename the file - the 30% was to Lisa - we don't need to voice it here.


text: Renamed `records/lawyers/templates/pitch_long_term_support_30pct.md` to `records/lawyers/templates/pitch_long_term_support_safety_stability.md` (and removed “30%” from the heading).


text: show me the file


text:
```text
# Long-Term Support / Stability Pitch (Template)

Last updated: 2026-02-26

```text
Hi Sarah,

I want to frame this discussion around a single objective: establishing long-term financial safety and stability in light of the structure of this marriage and my current circumstances.

Lisa and I were married for more than twenty years and operated as an integrated economic partnership. Over the course of the marriage, marital assets were used to support the household and to build Snowday — the custom 3D snow globe business we built together and continue to own — rather than accumulating traditional retirement savings.

Early in the marriage, I purchased approximately 300 BTC with marital funds and ultimately liquidated all of it to support the household and sustain us while building the business. I understand that subsequent appreciation is not the legal issue. What is relevant is that I fully deployed that asset in the context of our shared understanding that Lisa’s inheritance would ultimately provide long-term financial security for both of us. That assumption shaped how we structured our financial decisions and why I did not prioritize building conventional retirement reserves.

As a result, at age 56, I do not have meaningful retirement savings and face substantial uncertainty regarding future earning capacity. I am not seeking to challenge the classification of the trust principal. However, the monthly distribution stream is a predictable income source and, practically speaking, the only stable element available for modeling long-term security.

My goal is not to pursue a punitive result. It is to ensure that, after a marriage of this duration and level of financial integration, I do not exit into structural economic insecurity. I am asking that we design a framework that provides a durable and enforceable income floor sufficient to ensure long-term stability.

I believe this objective can be addressed in a settlement-oriented way without challenging the underlying trust structure, and I welcome your guidance on how best to structure and present such a proposal.

Thank you,
Karl
```
```