role: assistant

text: I’m adding this as a dated Wittrock/Maya note in the repo so the engagement-versus-mediation turn is easy to hand off later.


text: I found the right spot. I’m writing a dated follow-up note under `records/lawyers/wittrock/` that captures the corrected phone consult, the engagement packet, the mediator list, and your reply pausing engagement while mediation is explored.


text:
I made the note in [2026-03-10_followup_after_consult.md](/Users/qarl/project/divorce/legal/records/lawyers/wittrock/2026-03-10_followup_after_consult.md:1).

It captures:
- the Stephanie Jones scheduling glitch,
- the corrected phone consult with Sarah,
- the engagement letter / card auth / `\$5,000` retainer emails,
- the three mediator names,
- your hold message about exploring mediation first,
- and Maya’s acknowledgment.

If you want, I can also fold the same update into [HANDOFF.md](/Users/qarl/project/divorce/legal/HANDOFF.md:1) so it stays in the top-level summary too.


role: user

text: no that's fine.  Lisa wants to pursue mediation with Allison Gerli so let's begin that process.  we need a note explaining the situation from our point of view.


text: I’m pulling the existing legal summaries and timelines so the mediation note matches the repo’s facts and tone instead of freelancing.


text: The timeline file I expected isn’t in this repo root, so I’m keeping it tight and using the legal notes we do have. I’m checking the folder layout now so the mediation note lands somewhere sensible and easy to find later.


text: There’s already a `records/mediators/gerli/` folder with an opening-email draft in it. I’m reading that before I write anything new so I don’t step on an existing version.


text: I’ve got enough context. I’m writing this as a mediator-facing summary from Karl’s perspective: factual, settlement-oriented, but clear about the retirement-security problem and the structure of the marriage.


text:
I made the note in [2026-03-10_karl_perspective_case_note.md](/Users/qarl/project/divorce/legal/records/mediators/gerli/2026-03-10_karl_perspective_case_note.md:1).

It frames the case for Allison around:
- the long, integrated marriage,
- your role as primary income provider,
- retirement resources being spent on the household and Snow Day,
- Lisa’s `~$5M` trust and `~$19,000/month` distributions,
- your underemployment since `2017`,
- both of you being effectively retired since `2022`,
- and your core goal of long-term financial safety rather than punishment.

If you want, I can now turn that into a shorter `email-ready summary` for Allison or copy the note to your clipboard.


text: can you show it to me verbatim please?


text:
```text
Lisa and I were married in 2005 and were together for more than twenty years. Over the course of the marriage, we operated as an integrated economic partnership rather than as two financially separate people.

For most of the marriage, I was the primary income provider. Over time, marital resources were used to support the household and to build Snow Day, the custom 3D snow globe business we built together, rather than to accumulate conventional retirement savings. Early in the marriage, I also purchased approximately 300 BTC with marital funds and ultimately liquidated it to support the household and sustain us while building the business. My point in raising that is not to argue over later appreciation, but to explain how resources that could have become retirement security were instead deployed into the marriage and our shared enterprise.

I have been underemployed since 2017. Since Lisa's mother died in 2022, Lisa and I have both effectively been retired. At this point, I am 56 and do not have meaningful retirement savings. I also have serious trepidation about re-entering the job market in a way that would realistically solve the long-term financial problem now in front of me.

Lisa has a trust of roughly $5 million and receives approximately $19,000 per month in allowance or distribution income. I am not a beneficiary of that trust, and I am not looking to challenge the classification of the trust principal. From my perspective, however, the monthly distribution stream is the only stable and predictable source available for modeling a durable settlement.

The central issue for me is retirement security. My goal is not a punitive outcome. I am trying to avoid leaving a long marriage in a state of structural economic insecurity, especially given the way the marriage was organized financially and the expectations under which I made decisions during it.

I also want to be candid that the separation has felt abrupt and destabilizing from my side. I repeatedly pushed for us to confront major issues directly in therapy, and I do not feel I was given meaningful notice or a real opportunity to correct course before the marriage was ended. That context matters to me because it is part of why I now feel financially exposed and frightened about the future.

Even so, I would strongly prefer a settlement-oriented process over litigation. If mediation can help us reach a fair structure for support, security, and an orderly unwinding of financial issues, that is the path I want to pursue.
```


text: i'd like to add something about the retirement security.  mention that there is no time now to accrue a meaningful retirement savings.


text: I’m tightening the retirement paragraph in the Allison note so it explicitly says there isn’t realistic runway left to build meaningful retirement savings from scratch.


text:
I added it in [2026-03-10_karl_perspective_case_note.md](/Users/qarl/project/divorce/legal/records/mediators/gerli/2026-03-10_karl_perspective_case_note.md:12).

The revised paragraph now reads:

```text
I have been underemployed since 2017. Since Lisa's mother died in 2022, Lisa and I have both effectively been retired. At this point, I am 56 and do not have meaningful retirement savings, and I do not believe there is now enough time for me to build meaningful retirement savings from scratch. I also have serious trepidation about re-entering the job market in a way that would realistically solve the long-term financial problem now in front of me.
```

If you want, I can show the full note again with that change folded in.