The Work
November 18, 2008 9:00 AM
The Am Law Litigation Daily: November 18, 2008
Posted by Ed Shanahan
Edited by Andrew Longstreth and Alison Frankel
SECURITIES
Plaintiffs in AIG Class Action Seek to Disqualify Judge
A hotly contested battle for lead plaintiff (and lead counsel) has been
playing out since July in the securities class action against American
International Group. But that drama has taken a backseat to a
motion made public last week by two competing lead plaintiff candidates and
their counsel. Both plaintiffs are seeking to disqualify Manhattan federal
district court judge Loretta Preska--whose husband, a litigator at Cahill,
Gordon & Reindel, represents AIG.
The AIG plaintiffs claim in the underlying litigation that they are owed billions of dollars in damages because AIG misled investors about its portfolio of credit-default swaps. The four cases initially filed against AIG were assigned to
Manhattan federal district court judge Richard Sullivan, but AIG's attorneys
at Weil, Gotshal & Manges requested a transfer to Judge Preska, who was
already handling an AIG derivative action. Judge Preska filed a notice that
appeared on the docket before Judge Sullivan, disclosing that her husband,
Cahill partner Thomas Kavaler, works on matters for AIG. Nevertheless,
Sullivan granted Weil's motion and transferred the shareholder class action
to Preska.
The funds fighting to be named lead plaintiff--and their lawyers at
Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann and Bernstein, Liebhard &
Lifshitz--put aside their differences for long enough to file a joint motion to disqualify
Judge Preska, which draws upon public information and a declaration
provided by Cahill partner Edward Krugman. The plaintiffs lawyers argue that the judge's
interests are indirectly tied to the fate of AIG. They point out that
Kavaler, who is a member of Cahill's executive management committee, is
representing AIG in a class action pending before the Second Circuit (to
which Judge
Preska was recently nominated by President Bush). The plaintiffs' lawyers
also note that Cahill "currently represents AIG in seven ongoing litigations
[and] has previously represented AIG in 17 concluded cases."
The motion includes substantial financial information on fees AIG has paid
Cahill, but the data is redacted. Among the tantalizing information: a
redacted chart detailing the percent of Cahill revenue derived from AIG; an
estimate of Cahill's net income attributable to AIG fees; and an estimate of
Kavaler's take-home pay that's traceable to AIG fees. The plaintiffs contend
that Kavaler's work for AIG "[has had], and in all likelihood will continue
to have, a direct and substantial impact on the financial position of
the Kavaler household."
"Given the extent of Mr. Kavaler's take-home pay attributable to fees from
AIG," the plaintiffs lawyers add, "it cannot be doubted that a fair-minded
observer might reasonably question the court's impartiality, particularly
where, as here, it is conceivable that decisions in this case--which has
already become one of the central narratives in the current economic
crisis--could affect the viability of AIG and thus its future need for the
service of, and its ability to pay, outside counsel such as Cahill."
Sean Coffey of Bernstein Litowitz and Francis Karam of Bernstein Liebhard,
whose names appear on the motion, both declined to comment.
REGULATORY
Transition Time for U.S. Attorneys
Letters of resignation are starting to arrive from the country's 93 U.S.
attorneys. On Monday, the Associated Press reported that Manhattan U.S. attorney Michael Garcia informed Main
Justice that he's leaving for Kirkland & Ellis, confirming an
earlier report by The New York Times. And meanwhile, just a ferry ride from Garcia's Foley Square office, New Jersey U.S. attorney Christopher Christie also submitted his two-page resignation letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey. The letter reads a lot like a prelude to an announcement that Christie intends to run for governor, but so far the former Bush fundraiser has been mum on that question.
Another
newly departed U.S. attorney, Houston's Don DeGabrielle, participated in a
Q&A with the Houston Chronicle on Sunday. The newspaper's first question
to DeGabrielle, who's now a partner at Fulbright & Jaworski, highlighted the
sometimes difficult transition that former high-level government officials
have to make when they enter (or re-enter) the private sector:
Chronicle: You've been a prosecutor most of your career. What makes you
think you can now work the other side of cases?
DeGabrielle: I spent more than half of my life in law enforcement, and my
goal was seeking justice. As an FBI agent, a state prosecutor, or federal
prosecutor, I was always seeking justice and not just a conviction. There were times there were prosecutors, as well as agents, who may have
been overzealous in their pursuit of something. They were committed but not
necessarily mindful of a balance, of whether justice would be served at the
end of the day or whether it was just going to be a notch on someone's belt.
We had an enormous power to ruin people's lives, and I felt we had to be
very certain we had a case we could prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
REGULATORY
Mark Cuban Smacked with SEC Insider Trading Charges, Turns to Fish & Richardson, Dewey & LeBoeuf
Mark Cuban hates to lose. He said so on his
blog last week, after his NBA team, the Dallas Mavericks, got off to a
slow start. And that's just basketball. Yesterday the stakes for Cuban were
raised quite a bit with the news that the SEC
has filed insider trading charges against him. The pressure is now on
Cuban's defense counsel: Fish & Richardson's Paul Coggins and Dewey &
LeBoeuf's Ralph Ferrara.
In the
SEC complaint, filed in the Northern District of Texas, the government
alleges that Cuban sold his entire stake--600,000 shares--in an Internet
search company called Mamma.com (now known as Copernic.com) after receiving
nonpublic information. In 2004 the CEO of Mamma.com told Cuban about a plan
to raise capital through a PIPE (private investment in public entity).
According to the SEC, Cuban didn't like the plan and became angry. "Well,
now I'm screwed," he allegedly told the CEO. Cuban subsequently called his
broker and sold all of his Mamma.com shares in advance of the public
offering--which the SEC alleges to be a violation of insider trading laws.
The sell-off helped Cuban avoid more than $750,000 in losses.
Cuban's lawyers are a couple of veteran all-stars of white-collar work.
Coggins is a former Dallas U.S. attorney and Ferrara was the SEC's general
counsel before entering private practice. Neither Coggins nor Ferrara
returned our calls immediately, so it's unclear who will be taking the lead.
We know Fish & Richardson has long provided counsel to Cuban and the Dallas
Mavericks. One of the firm's partners, Steven Stodghill, served as team
counsel for the Mavs from 2000 to 2002 and has since represented the team in
various litigation matters.
On Monday afternoon Cuban updated his blog
with a post about the SEC's case, in which winning is again a central
idea. "I am disappointed that the Commission chose to bring this case based
upon its enforcement staff's win-at-any-costs ambitions," said Cuban. "The
staff's process was result-oriented, facts be damned. The government claims
are false and they will be proven so."
SECURITIES
Second Circuit Reinstates Kickback Class Action Against The Hartford
Here's some good news, for a change, for the beleaguered securities class
action bar: The Second Circuit yesterday reinstated a 2004
class action against The Hartford, which stems from former New York AG
Eliot Spitzer's investigation of kickbacks paid to insurance brokers Marsh
and Aon. The appellate judges vacated a ruling by
Connecticut federal district court judge Christopher Droney, who had granted The
Hartford's motion to dismiss the case on statute of limitations grounds.
"We're pleased that investors will have the opportunity to hold The Hartford accountable for fraudulently concealing kickbacks, bid rigging, and price manipulation," lead plaintiffs lawyer Eric Isaacson told the Litigation Daily in an e-mail. When we called The Hartford's lead counsel, Jack Auspitz of Morrison & Foerster, for comment, we received an e-mail response from the company. "The decision addressed a preliminary, procedural motion to dismiss the case on statute of limitations grounds," The Hartford's statement said. "The court held only that there was not enough publicly available information two years before the suit was filed to put an ordinary investor on inquiry notice of the claims. There has been no decision on the merits of the allegations. The Hartford continues to believe those allegations are completely meritless."
MoFo argued that investors had "storm warnings" of fraud at The Hartford
beginning in 2001, citing "complaints in four lawsuits that were filed in
California and Illinois state courts between 1999 and 2001; various articles
from news sources and industry newsletters; portions of regulatory filings
filed by The Hartford with the SEC; and samples of insurance filings,"
according to the Second Circuit ruling. But the Second Circuit--which
included a lengthy review of its prior "storm warning" rulings in its
opinion--found that these materials didn't give investors enough warning to
dismiss their case on summary judgment.
So for all the plaintiffs firms that have seen subprime securities class
actions dismissed in recent months, take heart. Sometimes you get a
second chance.
--Alison Frankel
REGULATORY
Behind Obama's New White House Counsel
When Barack Obama was considering a presidential run, he dubbed Williams &
Connolly partner Gregory Craig one of "the Kool-Aid boys" for his
enthusiastic support, according to a story in Newsweek. Later, during the presidential campaign, Obama addressed Craig as "Senator John McCain." Craig played the role of
Obama's Republican challenger during debate prep sessions, a role he
apparently played convincingly. "Don't lecture me about war," Craig
reportedly said during one session. "Do not tell me how to deploy men in
combat. I was flying a jet over Vietnam when you were in grade school."
Now that the campaign is over, Obama has a new name for Craig: White House
counsel. Legal Times
provides a bit of background on the 63-year-old. Between stints
at Williams & Connolly, where he was a protégé of Edward Bennett Williams,
Craig served as a foreign policy and national security adviser to
Massachusetts senator Edward Kennedy; worked under Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright; and was special counsel to the White House during
President Clinton's impeachment.
At Williams & Connolly he famously represented the father of Cuban refugee Elian Gonzalez in a
custody battle in 2000. More recently, he had been defending former Bolivian
president Gonzálo Sánchez de Lozada and former defense minister Carlos
Sánchez Berzaín (fourth item) against claims by relatives of civilians who were killed during
protests in Bolivia. Craig's future relationship with the firm remains
unclear, according to Legal Times.
WHITE-COLLAR
Prosecutors May Seek to Disqualify Dan Webb in Extortion Case
Troubled midwestern politicos seem to be a growing client base for Dan Webb.
A couple years ago, the chairman of Winston & Strawn represented former
Illinois governor George Ryan at a corruption trial. (Ryan was convicted and
is in prison.) More recently, he represented embattled Detroit mayor Kwame
Kilpatrick against charges of perjury, obstruction of justice, and
misconduct in office. (Kilpatrick made a plea deal and is in prison.) Webb's
latest is Illinois lobbyist and businessman William Cellini, who's been indicted for extorting contributions to the campaign of Governor
Rod Blagojevich.
At his arraignment last week, Cellini pled not guilty. (He's obviously hoping for a different outcome than Ryan and Kilpatrick got.) At the hearing,
Chicago federal prosecutors from U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald's office
indicated that they may seek to disqualify Webb. According to the Chicago
Sun-Times, assistant U.S. attorney Chris Niewoehner said Winston & Strawn
had represented a witness in the case, whose identity he did not disclose.
"I think this is a matter I should talk over with the government," Webb
reportedly said at the hearing. "I believe there is no conflict."
Comments (0)
Save & Share: Facebook |
Del.ic.ious |
| Email |
Reprints & Permissions
The comments to this entry are closed.
Comments
Report offensive comments to The Am Law Daily.