Declaration Of Helen J. Hodges In Support Of Lead Counsel's ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................1 II. III. IV. THE REGENTS NEGOTIATED THE 8%-10% ENRON FEE AGREEMENT AT ARM’S LENGTH..............................................................................................................12 THE INVESTIGATION OF FACTS: GATHERING DOCUMENTS AND WITNESS INTERVIEWS.................................................................................................18 THE FIRM AGGRESSIVELY PROSECUTED THE CASE BEFORE AND AFTER LEAD PLAINTIFF WAS APPOINTED .............................................................26 1. Motion to Freeze Insider Trading Gains....................................................26 2. Preventing Evidence Spoliation at Andersen.............................................28 3. Lead Counsel Subpoenas Andersen Witnesses and Secures Deposition Testimony re Document Destruction ......................................30 4. Expedited Discovery Concerning Document Destruction at Enron ..........31 5. Enjoining Andersen Proceeds....................................................................33 6. Lead Counsel Defeats Early Abusive “Class Certification” Discovery ...................................................................................................34 V. DRAFTING THE CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT ......................................................36 VI. LEAD COUNSEL’S PERSUASIVE SKILLS GENERATED THE TREMENDOUS RESULTS..............................................................................................38 1. Motions to Dismiss and Other Motion Practice.........................................38 2. Motions to Strike, Motions for Certification Under §1292(b) and Writs of Mandamus....................................................................................52 3. Additional Motions to Dismiss in Response to Lead Plaintiff’s First Amended Consolidated Complaint....................................................57 4. Motions to Intervene Additional Plaintiffs and Motions to Dismiss the WSIB Case...........................................................................................65 VII. DISCOVERY.....................................................................................................................68 1. Lead Counsel Serves Document Production Requests on the Financial Institutions and Seeks Other Relevant Documents....................68
2. The Parties Establish a Document Depository for the Exchange of Information ................................................................................................70 3. Lead Counsel Compels Enron Executives to Produce Particularized Discovery Concerning Financial Conflicts.........................70 4. Lead Plaintiff Defeats Efforts to Establish a Blanket Protective Order ..........................................................................................................72 5. Discovery Propounded by Lead Plaintiff...................................................73 6. Lead Counsel’s Interrogatories and Motions to Compel Responses .........81 7. Motion to Compel Citigroup Documents ..................................................82 8. Subpoenas and Moving to Compel Production of JPMorgan Documents .................................................................................................84 9. CIBC Is Forced to Deem Facts as Admitted..............................................85 10. Requests for Admission .............................................................................87 11. Lead Plaintiff Succeeds in Obtaining SEC and Bankruptcy Deposition Transcripts...............................................................................87 12. The Parties Agree to a Deposition Protocol Order ....................................88 13. Compelling Knowledgeable Rule 30(b)(6) Witnesses to Appear for Deposition..................................................................................................89 14. Lead Counsel Challenges the “Advice of Counsel” Defense ....................90 15. Lead Plaintiff Compels Production of Trading Data by the Financial Institutions..................................................................................91 16. Depositions ................................................................................................92 17. Lead Plaintiff’s Responses to Discovery .................................................100 a. Lead Counsel, Lead Plaintiff, Institutional Plaintiffs and Individuals Responded to Initial Class Certification Discovery .....................................................................................101 b. Lead Counsel, Lead Plaintiff and Class Representatives Respond to Interrogatories...........................................................102 c. Plaintiffs and Lead Counsel Answer Class Certification Requests for Admission ...............................................................103
Page 1: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHE
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:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
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 172 and 173:
ENRON - SUMMARY OF PLAINTIFFS' FIRM
Page 178:
EXHIBIT 4
Page 182 and 183:
TOP SECURITIES SETTLEMENTS Case Nam
Page 184 and 185:
Exhibit Listings and Notes regardin
show all

Declaration Of Helen J. Hodges In Support Of Lead Counsel's ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?