Mr. Greenberg:

Your December 17, 2003 letter to me contains the following statement:

"Over the course of the last year, we have obtained, directly and from Ms. Peyroux, evidence of numerous incidents of physically and verbally abusive behaviors by Mr. Galison against Ms. Peyroux.  This behavior contributed in part to Ms. Peyroux's ultimate decision to discontinue her business association with Mr. Galison in mid-2003.  Thereafter, Mr. Galison made numerous libelous and slanderous statements about Ms. Peyroux to her business colleagues and representatives.  Mr. Galison also made documented claims and threats against Ms. Peyroux and her business representatives, which caused her to contemplate filing criminal harassment charges against Mr. Galison when such behavior continued and began impacting her career."

(Jeffrey A. Greenberg's Letter of December 17, 2003 to Steven H. Robinson, page 4.)

The statements of purported fact set forth in this quotation are false.  Without limiting the foregoing:

1.       Mr. Galison never "criminally harass[ed]," assaulted or menaced Ms. Peyroux;

2.       Mr. Galison never physically abused Ms. Peyroux at any time, in any manner;

3.       Mr. Galison never "threatened" Ms. Peyroux or her "business representatives." Any claims he made were related to his legitimate business interests and were made in a reasonable manner; and

4.       Mr. Galison has never made a "libelous or slanderous" statement concerning Ms. Peyroux.

It is extremely unlikely that whatever "evidence" or "document[ation]" you actually have with respect to these allegations will withstand serious examination.  What you do not have are genuine medical records, police reports, tapes of Ms. Peyroux's 911 calls to the police, photographs of a battered Ms. Peyroux taken under circumstances that establish Mr. Galison's responsibility therefor, eyewitness accounts or any other authentic, credible evidence because no incident of physical abuse ever took place.  Mr. Galison never threatened Ms. Peyroux or anyone affiliated with her, and accordingly, it is similarly unlikely that you or any of Ms. Peyroux's "business representatives" have any credible documentation to the contrary.  Finally, particularly with respect to whatever allegedly defamatory statements that you claim were "libelous," you should have supporting documentary evidence to present, but you do not, because Mr. Galison never made any defamatory statement concerning Ms. Peyroux, much less one in writing, as you claim.

While Ms. Peyroux was the sole source of the false accounts of Mr. Galison's alleged physical abuse, they were merely an irritant and could be treated as such.  As I understand it, Ms. Peyroux has a reputation for unreliability, and apparently no one of experience credits her undocumented accounts of any significant matter.

If you had chosen to repeat these unfounded allegations solely to me, your actions would have been merely unfair and unprofessional.  But by inserting these statements in a letter copied to Ms. Herbst and Mr. Willard, you published them to third parties, and you took this matter to an entirely different level.  Your repetition of these unfounded allegations in correspondence sent on your law firm's letterhead to important people in the music industry, bolstered by additional false claims as to the existence of supporting "evidence," lent credibility to what might otherwise have been discounted. 

I will make the point in detail elsewhere that these allegations have no legitimate bearing on any legal issue that this matter involves and that making these allegations required you to violate at least two Disciplinary Rules. The immediate point is that your December 17, 2003 letter has rendered Ms. Peyroux, you, and your firm liable to Mr. Galison for defamation. 

I have been authorized to prepare litigation papers to assert Mr. Galison's claims for defamation and any other causes of action that arise from the dissemination of these falsehoods by Ms. Peyroux, you and your firm.  That effort will go forward through the holidays without interruption.  Litigation will commence as soon as the papers are ready.  The only thing Mr. Galison is prepared to accept in settlement of his claims prior to the commencement of litigation is a statement on your firm's letterhead recanting the false statements of fact in the quotation set forth above, in a form acceptable to him, with proof of receipt of that statement by Ms. Herbst and Mr. Willard.  Provided that your statement makes plain that these allegations are entirely untrue, Mr. Galison has no objection to the inclusion of an additional explanatory statement.  Thus, you will be free to characterize the presence of the quotation set forth above in your December 17, 2003 letter as the result of miscommunication, administrative error, or in whatever other face saving terms you might want.  Once litigation commences, this offer will be automatically withdrawn with no further notice to you, and Mr. Galison will then seek every appropriate remedy for the damage Ms Peyroux, you, and your firm have done to his reputation.   

Pending the resolution of his claims for defamation, Mr. Galison is suspending negotiations with Ms. Peyroux with respect to "Got You On My Mind."  He has no obligation or inclination to sit at a table with people who believe that the dissemination of gratuitous, injurious falsehoods concerning him is an appropriate tool for advocacy or negotiation.  Because Rounder Records, Inc. ("Rounder") is not involved in this matter, Mr. Galison will continue to cooperate with Rounder to develop approaches as to how the legitimate business interests of all parties can be reconciled. 

Very truly yours, SR