Anwar et al v. Fairfield Greenwich Limited et al

Filing 826

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY IN SPECIFIED STANDARD CHARTERED CASES: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the undersigned counsel for parties in the Stipulating Actions, that as set forth in this Stipulation. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Theodore H. Katz on 3/02/2012) (ama)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

PASHA S. ANWAR, et al.•

I

''''Ltl·! .

-­;r

Plaintiffs,

v.
FAJRFJEW GREENWICH LIMITED,
et al.,

Master File No. 09-CV -118 (VM) (THK)

Defendant~.

This Document Relates To: Specified
Standard Chartered Cases

STIPULATION AND ~J ORDER REGARDING
DISCOVERY IN SPECIFIED STANDARD CHARTERED CASES

WHEREAS. plaintiffs represented by undersigned coWlSel have brought the
foIlowing forty-one actions (the "Actions") raising similar, and in many actions identical,
allegations and causes of actions concerning the conduct of Standard Chartered arising out of

those plaintiffs' investments in the Fairfield l''''unds: (1) 5C Investments Ltd. v. Standard
Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et al. No. l1-cv..o0907; (2) Almiron v.
Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited el al, No. 10-cv-6187; (3) Archangel
Resources Limited et al v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et al. No.
11-cv-05717; (4) Asemia v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et ai,
No. ll-cv-908; (5) Auburn Overseas Corp. v. Standard Chartered Bank International

(Americas) Limited et ai, No. l1-cv-904; (6) Bahia Del Rio, S.A v. Stando.rd Chartered Bank
International (Americas) Limited et at No. ll-cv-05716; (7) Baymaliinvestments Limited v.
Standard Chanered Bank International (Americas) Limited, No. ll-cv..()7649; (8) Blockbend
Limited v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited. No. ll-cv-07650;
(9) Blount International, S.A. v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) limited et

; ~i,;

b

\
!

a~

No. ll-cv-05719; (10) Carrillo v. Standard Chartered Bank Ihternational (Americas) Limited

et al, No. 10-cv-6187; (11) Diaz de Camara v. Standard Chartered Bank International
(Americas) Umited ct a~ No. l1-cv-05719; (12) Dougherty v. Standard Chartered Bank
International (Americas) Umited et a~ No. 11-cv-05721; (13) EastjorkAssets Limited v.
Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited, No. l1-cv-07653; (14) Echeverri de
Mata v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et ai, No. 11-cv-05723;
(15) Escobar et al v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited, No. 11-cv­
23120; (16) Gerico, Inc. et al v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et

ai, No. 11-cv-909; (17) Interland Investments Corp. v. Standard Chartered Bank International
(Americas) Limited et a~ No. l1-cv-905; (18) Iston Holdings Limited et al v. Standard
Chartered Bank Intemational (AmericasJ..Limited et ai, No. ll-cv-901; (19)Iima v'. Standard
Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited, et aI. No. ll-cv-22189 ("Uma"); (20) Lopez
et al v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et al, No. to-cv-919;
(21) Mailand Investment, Inc. v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Ltd., No.
11-cv"()5732; (22) Mantecon v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et al,
No. ll-cv-05729; (23) Maplehurst Holdings Ltd. v. Standard Chartered Bank International

(Americas) Umited et ~ No. 11-cv-8372; (24) Mizrahi·v. Standard Chartered Bank
International (Americas) Limited et al, No. 11-cv-6788; (25) Nautical Village, Inc. v. Standard
Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et al, No. ll-cv-07652; (26) New Horizon
Development, Inc. ttt al v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et ai, No.
11-ev-00898; (27) Novella v. Standard Chartered Bank Internationai (Americas) Limited et al,

No. 11-ev-05724; (28) Perez v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et ai,
No. l1-cv-00903 r'Perez"); (29) Phannqfoods International C. V. et al v. Standard Chartered

Bank International (Americas) Limited et a~ No. ll-cv·05730; (30) Positano Investments Ltd. v.
Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et a/, No. 1t-ev-B37l; (31) Quiroz
Stone v. Standard Chartered Bank In~rnational (Americas) Limited et al, No. 11-cv-07651;

-2­

II,

(32) Rendiles v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) limited st a~ No. 11 ~cv*
902; (33) Richmond Company Ltd. v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas)
Limited et al, No. ll-cv-05725; (34) Ruiz v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas)
Limited et ql., No. l1-cv-00900; (35) Sabillon v. Standard Chartered Bank International
(Americas) Limited et al, No. ll-cv-05726 ("Sabillon"); (36) Salcar limited v. Standard
Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et ai, No. ll-cv-00899 ("Salcar'); (37) San
Bias S.A. et al v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) limited ef al, No. ll-cv- .
05727 ("San Bias"); (38) Sand Overseas Limited v. Standard Chartered Bank International
(Americas) Limited et al, No. 11-cv-24115; (39) Smerant Corp. v. Standard Chartered Bank
International (Americas) limited et al. No. l1-cv-05728 ; (40) Tierra C. V. et al v. Standard
Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et al, No. ll-cv-05731; (41) Triple R Holdings
Ltd et al v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Limited et al, No. ll-cv-897
("Triple R"'); and (42) Vilebens, S.L. et at v. Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas)
Limited et at, No. 11-cv-906 (the "Stipulating Actions");

WHEREAS, counsel for the parties to the Stipulating Actions have conferred
regarding the efficient management of these actions and believe that the burdens on the parties
and the Court will be substantially reduced. the ability to complete coordinated discovery under
the Second Amended Scheduling Order Regarding Standard Chartered Cases entered by this
Court on February 4, 2011, wiD be substantially enhanced, and judicial economy will best be
served. if remaining plaintiff-specific discovery is limited to a subset of the Stipulating Actions,
which actions will then be the subject of any dispositive motions, including any summary
judgment motions, because the Court's rulings in those actions likely will make clear what (if
any) plaintiff-specific issues remain for trial;,

WHEREAS, to the extent plaintiff-specific issues remain for trial following this
Court's rulings on any dispositive motion, the parties believe plaintiff specific discovery can be
efficiently addressed at that time;

-3­

WHEREAS, the procedures set forth in this StipUlation and Proposed Order are
wholly separate and apart from the coordinated discovery that has been taking place in the
above-captioned consolidated proceeding (the "Fairfield MDL") concerning the conduct of
Standard Chartered Bank International (Americas) Ltd. (''SCnf') and its affiliates in allegedly
reconunending investments in Fairfield Sentry Ud. and Fairfield Sigma Ltd. (the ''Fairfield
Funds') and shall not impede or limit coordinated discovery in the Consolidated proceeding or
otherwise affect the current pretrial schedule of the consolidated proceeding;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by

and between the undersigned counsel for parties in the StipUlating Actions, that:
1.

Exclnding Salcar, Perez; San Bla.s S.A.; Triple R; Lima; and Sabillon (the

"Summary Judgment caSes''), the parties in the Stipulating Actions will defer further discovery
concerning plaintiff~specific issues, including the depositions of plaintiff'S and any persons who
controlled plaintiffs' investment decisions. until after the Court issues its final decision and order
deciding summary judgment in the Summary Judgment Cases;
2.

Upon the Court's fmal deCision and order on summary judgment in the Summary

Judgment Cases. the parties in the Stipulating Actions (excluding the SUIlUDary Judgment

cases)

shall meet and confer·regarding what plaintiff-specific discovery (if any) is appropriate in light
of the Court's ruling(s). but, in all events, plaintiffs in any action not resolved by dispositive
motion who has not been deposed shall make himself, herself or itself available to be deposed
before the start of trial;
3.

The parties agree that this stipulated order and the agreement contained herein

will not affect discovery. discovery deadlines or the current pretrial schedule in any other case
pending in the Fairfield MDL, and will not alter the rights of any party regarding the
presumptive limit on recalling for a second deposition any witness who is deposed before the
close of fact discovery, as set forth in Paragraph 7 of the Second Amended Scheduling Order
Regarding Standard Chartered Cases.

DATE: February

Ii..

2012

~~

.,

Laurence E. Curran

Attorney for Plaintiffa SC Investments Ud.,

Arohangel Resources Ltd. et all Asensio,

Auburn Overseas Corp., Bahia Del Rio

S.A.,.Blount litte:matioDal SA., Diu de

Camara. Dougherty, Echeverri de Mala,

Interland Investments Corp•• 18ton

Hold. Ltd. et ai, Uma, Lopez el al,

Mantecon. MapJeburst Holdings Ltd.,

I.

Mizrahi, Nautical Village Inc., New

Horir.on. et al. Nove1la. Perez.

Phatmafoods Intemational C.V. elal.

PosltaDo Investments Ltd•• Quiroz Stone,

Rendiles, Richmond Company Ltd., Ruiz.

Sabillon. SalalI' Ltd.. San BIas et 01. Sand

Overseas Ltd., Smerant Cmp., Tien:a C.V.

et al, Triple R Holdings lJ:d. et al, and

Vilebens S.L. et al

DAT'B: February

til 2012
oe1 S.

lniclc

~x:JCy for Plaintiffs Bayrnall

Inv

DATE: February

DATB: Febxuory

ti~12
i~

Ltd., Blockbeod Ltd.. Bastforlt

Assets Ltd., Escobar et al. Gerlco

Investments, Inc. et ai, and Mai1and

Investment Inc~

ro:'&'~
L. JOnel
Attorney for Plaintiffs Almiron and
Canillo

S~~&CRO~~

~

.

.

SO ORDERED this 2

I

day of

nL.Nolles
Attorneys for Defendants Standard
Chartered Bank International (Americas)
Ud. and Standard Chartered PLC

'~~'2~~
THEODORE KATz

L

U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGB

-6-

.

.