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

149. On February 2, 2004, Lead Counsel served on CIBC nine RFAs, demanding CIBC
admit or deny the factual statements contained in CIBC’s December 22, 2003 agreement were true
and correct. The RFAs also demanded CIBC admit or deny its Enron-related transactions failed to
comply with GAAP and CIBC knew its transactions would falsify Enron’s financial statements.
CIBC responded on March 3, 2004, but in Lead Counsel’s view, failed to properly respond to the
RFAs by providing evasive responses.
150. On April 13, 2004, Lead Counsel filed a Motion to Compel Deemed Admissions by
CIBC (Docket No. 2080). Lead Plaintiff argued CIBC failed to admit or deny the facts, and instead
relied on pages of objections and definition “clarifications,” rendering CIBC’s purported
“admissions” incomprehensible and hollow. Lead Counsel also challenged CIBC’s convoluted
responses, evasive qualifications, and repeated cross-referencing of answers. Lead Counsel called
the response “unacceptable” and argued the RFAs would serve to reduce the factual issues in the
massive and complex Enron litigation. CIBC opposed on May 3, 2004, arguing its agreement with
the DOJ and others spoke for itself, and arguing its response was in accord with the Federal Rules
(Docket No. 2121).
151. On August 27, 2004, the Court ruled in Lead Plaintiff’s and Lead Counsel’s favor
(Docket No. 2367) (“8/27/04 Order”). The Court said CIBC’s objections “are not justified and its
cross-referencing and incorporating are confusing.” 8/27/04 Order at 3. The Court ordered that
eight of the nine RFAs “are deemed admitted” by CIBC, and CIBC was afforded ten additional days
to respond to the ninth RFA. Id. This was a significant ruling in Lead Plaintiff’s favor. The
Admissions circumscribed the factual dispute between the parties, curtailed evasive responses that
would have wasted judicial and litigant resources, and permitted focused discovery on the remaining
factual issues.
- 86 -