Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 1156

ENDORSED LETTER addressed to Magistrate Judge Frank Maas from Richard E. Brodsky dated 6/21/201 re: I am counsel for the Maridom Plaintiffs and am writing as Liaison Counsel for the Standard Chartered Plaintiffs' Steering Committee. This letter is in response to the letter to Your Honor from a Paul Weiss attorney, Andrew Gordon, earlier today. Moreover, this egregious situation is not solved by belatedly providing us notice of the remaining deposition schedule. We need to know when Sullivan & Cromwell was provided effective notice of the depositions; they had a major advantage over us because of what amounted to advance notice, and it is astounding that any lawyer would claim lack of responsibility for affirmatively providing fair notice to all counsel of upcoming depositions. We also need to have the opportunity to retake those depositions that took place over the last two weeks. This relief is requested in our first letter sent yesterday. ENDORSEMENT: While I understand Mr. Brodsky's dismay, I also understand that opposing counsel have offered to work with him to ameliorate any prejudice. Absent some indication that both sides have conferred in good faith and been unable to reach a suitable resolution, I do not intend to take any further steps. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Frank Maas on 6/24/2013) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:09-cv-00118-VM-FM et al.(djc)

From: Richard E. Brodsky

Fax: [phone]

r.===:'~==:;;::::==.;,

uSDcsn1fi.!E BRO

DOCUME~T

Page 2 of 3 6/21120135:27

Fax: [phone]

To:

KY LA W

FIRM~ pM~MIl ENDORSEn

RICHARD

ELECIT{ONICALLY FILED

DOC#:

DATE FI':::L=E=-D-:-,;-l,'-1.-~""h-c-o-

E.

BRODSK •

U

R

June 21,2013

',' '.I ,,: "".

.

J ~J ·3-·od~ K<-/\ ',::;

rl U ,,\ {)It>.I,J> 'tLLA"L
I ',' ,I.. I 7""

t

.,",-~ "'¥

\

~:::.

\ \,'\

{~

"(
(Lx

I

~ 0

U

~l

n < \ ..,
{I!. L'"" ~...-'( ,I..

nu.

-J

n()" .'--'l' \
DiJ.....·"'
'-'

r
'

Th~ Han. Frank M~as
' . '
Umted States MagIstrate Judge crffo~'-..LA,- Co \.. '\A. \~ ~Ut.uL llU
'tJ
Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse.
\'
I"., L ,
500 Pearl Street
CUo,,--C'-. lu, \\,,- \\IH\ n')<.,~tl<Q..A(OV<l"/i::......

\u--

A b ,,', J
'- -rt". u.T 10 ~'-

GtA"-, I(~ A~

New Yo,k, New York 10007-1312

Re:

Anwar v. Fairfield Greenwich L.U.cLC6 ' :
No. 09-cv-llB (S.D.N.Y.),
J
I
Standard Chartered Cases (1IlA3!·I-V~. D LA..-L.
I I
A...a- n C l ___
Dear Judge Maas:
Ul.l4..p'-'L...
..

,.,.J

/5f' (.) 0

V-i-

c;1

L-'

l-LO

-t-

Ofl,UL

C>\....u:u~

""25'£1.L-q
L J --b-eJ..:A'~

n 'R ("

\4."-.-A.'- ~.

Su

\

fl-----c­

t-t<J,) llC-

~' , .
.J\.Jj\. () (u L 0
I
--Q.

L,- /

lLL~(..J -\-0 -n_..L~O-:c.-~

I am counsel for the Maridom Plaintiffs and am writing as Liaison Counsel Q~.....-v
for the Standard Chartered Plaintiffs' Steering Committee.

" tLr

tLii

s,

This letter is in response to the letter to Your Honor from a Paul WeiJS1
attorney, Andrew Gordon, earlier today.
' --rr-'-{{~
Not only does Mr. Gordon completely avoid several issues _. that notice was
being provided to the Standard Chartered Defendants but not the Standard
Chartered Plaintiffs, that, under the Anwar pretrial order the burden of infOl'ming
the Plaintiffs lay with the lawyers taking the depositions, and the need to remedy
past violations of that burden .. but he seriously misstates the facts. In particular,
the idea that Paul Weiss, among- others, did not know of Ollr concerns is simply
wrong. I do not know the extent of Mr. Gordon's personal knowledge and am not
accusing him of a knowing misrepresentation. Nevertheless, what he states is
simply not true -- specifically, the following statement:

/

I) I tL"1
l'·j

These are the facts, based on my personal knowledge:

tM1JitN'OO RS En
m

200

s.

BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, STE. 1930· MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131

WWW.TIUBRODSKYLAWFIRM.COM

786-220-3328· [e-mail]

,

6/l-<f11~

Until we received this letter from counsel for the Maridom Plaintiffs, we were
not aware that this was even an issue for the Maridom Plaintiffs.
Significantly, counsel did not, as contemplated by Local Rule 37.2, raise this
issue with us before submitting their letter to the Court. Further, given that
the Standard Charter defendants have appeared at depositions, we had
assumed the Maridom Plaintiffs were aware of the depositions that had been
scheduled.

1.
The Standard Chartered Plaintiffs were informed Friday, June 14,
2013, of the deposition the following Monday, in New York, of Amit Vijayvergiya,
Head of Risk Management of Fairfield Greenwich (Berm udail;hwho was
responsible fo, analyzing the trading supposedly done at BL.

J

From: Richard E. Brodsky

Fax: (&8S) 391·5&19

To:

Fax: +1 (212) &05·6724

Page 3 of:3 6/2112013 5:27

.Plon. Frank Maas

June 21, 2013
Page 2

Fund. It so happened that Jorge Mestre of the Rivero Mestre firm was in New York
with his family that weekend, so he stayed over for the Vijayvergiya deposition and
that of another Fairfield official, Monday through Wednesday. Mr. Mestre, and I
(over the telephone) strenuously objected to the lack of notice. At least two Paul
Weiss lawyers were present; indeed, as I recall, a Paul Weiss lawyer was conducting
the deposition.
2.
Yesterday, when the deposition of Gil Berman commenced, I (over the
telephone) again strenuously objected to the fact that we were not provided notice of
the Berman deposition. A comparable objection was made, as I understand it, by
Rivero Mestre attorney Erimar von der Osten. A Paul Weiss lawyer listened and
said nothing.

Moreover, this egregious situation is not solved by belatedly pl'Oviding us
notice of the remaining deposition schedule. We need to know when Sullivan &
Cromwell was provided effective notice of the depositions; they had a major
advantage over us because of what amounted to advance notice, and it is astounding
that any lawyer would claim lack of responsibility for affirmatively providing fair
notice to all counsel of upcoming depositions. We also need to have the opportunity
to t'etake those depositions that took place over the last two weeks. This relief is
requested in our first letter sent yesterday.
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
Sincerely yours,
rodsky Law Firm

Richard E. Brodsky
cc:

Counsel for Standard Chartered Defendants
Counsel for Standard Chartered Plaintiffs
Counsel for Anwar parties sending and receiving emails re depositions