- Page 1 and 2:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHE
- Page 3 and 4:
2. The Parties Establish a Document
- Page 5 and 6:
I, HELEN J. HODGES, declare as foll
- Page 7 and 8:
• Reviewed over 70 million pages
- Page 9 and 10:
6. The above recoveries were based
- Page 11 and 12:
gathered and which the banks and En
- Page 13 and 14:
14. In this endeavor, Coughlin Stoi
- Page 15 and 16:
17. Lead Counsel prosecuted the lit
- Page 17 and 18:
[T]his representation has been unde
- Page 19 and 20:
and the necessary involvement with
- Page 21 and 22:
case. The Court hereby awards attor
- Page 23 and 24:
published an article, “Enron Jolt
- Page 25 and 26:
statements. We compiled profiles on
- Page 27 and 28:
34. We had no way of knowing whethe
- Page 29 and 30:
which witnesses to pursue, but cont
- Page 31 and 32:
the market in October 2001. The ana
- Page 33 and 34:
said it was unable to determine whe
- Page 35 and 36:
depositions because discovery was p
- Page 37 and 38:
65. After the motion was filed, The
- Page 39 and 40:
institutional plaintiffs, their rep
- Page 41 and 42:
drawing on the expertise of our in-
- Page 43 and 44:
83. On May 3, 2002, the Preferred P
- Page 45 and 46:
finance certain of the partnerships
- Page 47 and 48:
and participated in a scheme to def
- Page 49 and 50:
(j) Arthur Andersen LLP (Docket No.
- Page 51 and 52:
Lead Plaintiff had adequately alleg
- Page 53 and 54:
(a) The Court ruled that Lead Plain
- Page 55 and 56:
director of New Power, and issuance
- Page 57 and 58:
94. On September 26, 2002, Lead Pla
- Page 59 and 60:
mandamus review, and that the Court
- Page 61 and 62:
106. On May 6, 2003, defendant Citi
- Page 63 and 64:
scheme, and certain specific allega
- Page 65 and 66:
pled with the requisite particulari
- Page 67 and 68:
Merrill Lynch and Deutsche Bank Ent
- Page 69 and 70:
4. Motions to Intervene Additional
- Page 71 and 72:
Gramm, Jaedicke, LeMaistre, Meyer,
- Page 73 and 74:
professionals and experts, and atte
- Page 75 and 76:
121. On May 7, 2003, the Outside Di
- Page 77 and 78:
of Enron’s prominence and magnitu
- Page 79 and 80:
131. As part of discovery, Lead Cou
- Page 81 and 82:
Third Parties and Defendants Date S
- Page 83 and 84:
Third Parties and Defendants Date S
- Page 85 and 86:
133. Document requests and subpoena
- Page 87 and 88:
139. In responding to the document
- Page 89 and 90:
146. In addition to JPMorgan’s in
- Page 91 and 92:
10. Requests for Admission 152. In
- Page 93 and 94:
Protocol Order provided for the ord
- Page 95 and 96:
privilege. And the defendants agree
- Page 97 and 98:
Deponent Entity Date[s] Location No
- Page 99 and 100:
Deponent Entity Date[s] Location No
- Page 101 and 102:
Deponent Entity Date[s] Location No
- Page 103 and 104:
Deponent Entity Date[s] Location No
- Page 105 and 106:
promptly responded to all discovery
- Page 107 and 108:
Enron securities, and questions con
- Page 109 and 110:
securities, understanding of a repr
- Page 111 and 112:
187. Lead Counsel made further supp
- Page 113 and 114:
April 16, 2004, Lead Counsel filed
- Page 115 and 116:
195. On April 13, 2004, defendants
- Page 117 and 118:
Plaintiffs’ Investors Partner Lif
- Page 119 and 120:
• Outside Directors’ Memorandum
- Page 121 and 122: 208. A two-day hearing was held reg
- Page 123 and 124: Expert Entity Area of Opinion Dorri
- Page 125 and 126: and is the basis for a presumption
- Page 127 and 128: nature of Enron’s financial condi
- Page 129 and 130: economically valid method and frame
- Page 131 and 132: primarily involving Deutsche Bank,
- Page 133 and 134: We filed a notice of request for se
- Page 135 and 136: 236. Bankruptcy Examiner Batson him
- Page 137 and 138: egarding the §11 claims, which wer
- Page 139 and 140: proceeds for our settlement. Thus,
- Page 141 and 142: egarding the policies and he moved
- Page 143 and 144: team; for example, we reviewed info
- Page 145 and 146: Court ruled that Lead Plaintiff fai
- Page 147 and 148: Opposition to Deutsche Bank’s Mot
- Page 149 and 150: Sec. Litig., 443 F.3d 987 (8th Cir.
- Page 151 and 152: Plaintiff’s Opposition to Motion
- Page 153 and 154: dated June 5, 2006 as It Pertains t
- Page 155 and 156: the Pleadings (Docket No. 5019). On
- Page 157 and 158: joint-and-several liability for kno
- Page 159 and 160: pricing or trade volume data, estim
- Page 161 and 162: y the court and cited in In re Cend
- Page 163: 296. Attached hereto as Ex. 2 is a
- Page 166 and 167: ADDITIONAL SERVICE LIST Stuart Yoes
- Page 168 and 169: ENRON COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN
- Page 170 and 171: Name Title Hours Rate Lodestar Meye
- Page 178: EXHIBIT 4
- Page 182 and 183: TOP SECURITIES SETTLEMENTS Case Nam
- Page 184 and 185: Exhibit Listings and Notes regardin