Irving H. Picard v. Saul B. Katz et al

Filing 167

DECLARATION of Regina Griffin in Support re: 162 FIFTH MOTION in Limine To Deem Statements By Sterling Stamos Employees In The Course Of And In Connection With Their Employment By Sterling Stamos As Admissions of The Sterling Defendants.. Document filed by Irving H. Picard. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2 - Filed Under Seal Pursuant to Protective Order, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15 -1, # 16 Exhibit 15 - 2)(Sheehan, David)

Exhibit 4

1

1

C O N F I D E N T I A L

2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
11-CV-03605(JSR)(HBP)

3
4
5

--------------------------------x

6

IRVING H. PICARD, Trustee for
the Liquidation of Bernard L.
Madoff Investment Securities LLC,

7
8

Videotaped
Deposition of:

Plaintiff,
v.

KEVIN DUNLEAVY

9
SAUL B. KATZ, et al.,
10
Defendants.
11
--------------------------------x
12
13
14
15

TRANSCRIPT of testimony as taken by and before

16

MONIQUE VOUTHOURIS, Certified Court Reporter, RPR,

17

CRR, and Notary Public of the States of New York and

18

New Jersey, at the offices of Baker & Hostetler, 45

19

Rockefeller Plaza, New York, New York, on Wednesday,

20

December 21, 2011, commencing at 9:13 a.m.

21
22
23
24
25

PICARD v. KATZ, et al.

CONFIDENTIAL

KEVIN DUNLEAVY 12/21/11
2

1

A P P E A R A N C E S:

2
3
4
5

BAKER & HOSTETLER, LLP
45 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, New York 10111
BY: REGINA L. GRIFFIN, ESQ.
STACEY A. BELL, ESQ.
AMANDA E. FEIN, ESQ.
For Plaintiff, Irving Picard, Trustee

6
7
8
9

DAVIS, POLK & WARDWELL, LLP
450 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10017
BY: KAREN E. WAGNER, ESQ.
ALEX A. CROHN, ESQ.
For Sterling Equities and certain
affiliated entities

10
11
12

LOEB & LOEB, LLP
345 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10154-1895
BY: ALYSON M. WEISS, ESQ.
For the witness, Kevin Dunleavy

13
14
15

ALSO PRESENT:
DANIEL McCLUTCHY, Videographer

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
BENDISH REPORTING, INC.
877.404.2193

PICARD v. KATZ, et al.

CONFIDENTIAL

KEVIN DUNLEAVY 12/21/11
69

1

Stamos?

2

A.

Yes, yes.

3

Q.

4

approximately?

5

A.

6

Q.

And do you know when that was

Again, I think somewhere around '07.
What kind of background check was

7

conducted in connection with the diligence of

8

Sterling Stamos?

9

MS. WAGNER:

10

Q.

I'm sorry.

Objection.
Did Merrill Lynch conduct

11

a background check into Sterling Stamos in connection

12

with its diligence before proceeding to acquire an

13

ownership interest?

14

A.

Yes, as we talked about, you know, the

15

investment due diligence and the operational due

16

diligence.

17

I'm sure they did.

18

it.

19

Shapiro due diligence group.

20

Were you talking about the personnel?
I don't know the specifics about

That was handled through the Will Eisenbeis/Josh

Q.

Do you know who from Sterling Stamos

21

was involved in the negotiations with Merrill Lynch

22

concerning Merrill's acquisition of an ownership

23

interest?

24

A.

25

I would expect Peter would have been

involved and then who counsel was at that time there
BENDISH REPORTING, INC.
877.404.2193

PICARD v. KATZ, et al.

CONFIDENTIAL

KEVIN DUNLEAVY 12/21/11
70

1

or not, I don't know.

2

Q.

3

A.

Was Saul Katz involved?
The only recollection I have of Saul

4

being involved is at the very end in and around the

5

specifics of the liquidity issues and the clawback.

6
7

Q.

What do you mean by the liquidity

issues?

8

A.

Sterling Stamos' largest or one of

9

their largest investors was the Katz-Wilpon family.

10

We were paying a multiple on forward-based earnings

11

for the valuation of the firm.

12

around that pile of assets that the Wilpons and

13

Katzes had in the fund from the standpoint that they

14

would have to have those amount of dollars invested

15

in the fund over a specific period of years.

16

not remember what those exact years were.

17

There was a lockup

I do

Saul objected to not having access to

18

that liquidity of funds if they needed it, and it was

19

our contention but that's why we're paying you a

20

multiple.

21

would stay in there, then we have to pay a lower

22

price.

If we didn't believe that those funds

23

And so the deal that was struck was,

24

and I'm paraphrasing, that if they pulled the money

25

out early, they would have to pay a penalty fee
BENDISH REPORTING, INC.
877.404.2193