Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1 :04-cv-01494-JJF Document 91 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 3
Greenberg
O
Traurig
October 17, 2006
VIA ECF AND HAND DELIVERY
The Honorable Joseph J. Farnan, Jr.
United States District Court
District of Delaware
844 King Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Magten Asset Management Corp., et al. v. North Western Corp.,
C.A. N0. 04-1494-JJF ALEAMY
Magten Asset Management Corp. it Paul Hastings Janofsky & AMSTERDAM
Walker; LLB C.A. No. 04-1256-JJF ATLANTA
Magten Asset Management Corp. v. Mike .L Hanson and Ernie .L BOCA RATON
Kimlt, C.A. N0. 05-0499-JJF Bosrow
BRUSSELS*
Dear Judge Farnan: CHICAGO
This is firm is co-counsel to NorthWestem Corporation ("NorthWestern”), EEHTIEAAI
along with the firm of Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle LLP ("Curtis") in connection
with C.A. No. 04-1494-J J F, referenced above. We write in response to the letter dated DENVER
October 16, 2006 sent to Your Honor by counsel for plaintiffs, Magten Asset Management FORT AAOOEROAAE
Corporation ("Magten") and Law Debenture Trust (collectively, "Plaintiffs”). HOUSTON
LAS VEGAS
As is apparent from that letter, there is substantial disagreement between the L¤~¤¤A·*
parties regarding the scheduling of discovery in these three consolidated actions. In order to LOSANGEEES
resolve these differences, NorthWestem respectively requests that the Court schedule a MM
conference with the parties pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16. MILANA"
The Defendants inthe three consolidated actions have conferred and have
jointly agreed on a proposed Scheduling Order for discovery and other pre-trial matters in OAANOA OOHNIN
the consolidated actions, which is enclosed herewith, and which Defendants respectively OIIIANIIO
request be approved by the Court. Defendants’ proposed Scheduling Order provides, inter IIHIIAHIIIIHIA
alia, for completion of fact discovery within twelve months following the Rule 16 PHOENIX
Conference, and an additional two months for completion of expert discovery. NO
ME*
Plaintiffs have proposed that fact discovery in all three consolidated actions SACRAMENTO
be completed in approximately four and a half months. Such a timetable is manifestly SLLLLON YALLEY
unreasonable for a number of reasons. First, this case involves three separate actions, one of TALLAELASSEE
which is against NorthWestem’s attorneys. Not only have the Plaintiffs served discovery T<>· requests which call for literally hundreds of thousands, if not millions of pages of doctunents, rvsorrs c¤r<~rr<
but many of these documents will necessarily involve attomey-client communications which Wrsrrmeren, D.C.
must carefully be reviewed for privilege. Second, the schedule proposed by the Defendants wm PALM BEACH
ZURICH
Greenberg Traurig, LLP I Attorneys at Law |The Nemours Building I 1007 North Orange Street I Suite 1200 |Wilmington, DE 19801 Tokyo-0.mCE/StrategicMime
TGI $02.6617000 I FBX 302.661]*360 www_g{I3w_q0m
3189088vl

Case 1 :04-cv-01494-JJF Document 91 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 2 of 3
The Honorable Joseph J. Faman, Jr.
Page 2 October 17, 2006
is entirely reasonable in light of the discovery schedule Plaintiffs previously agreed to in one
of the three consolidated actions, the action against Defendants Hanson and Kindt. There,
the Plaintiffs agreed to a discovery schedule of thirteen months — eight months of fact
discovery and five additional months for expert discovery. Clearly, completion of discovery
in the three consolidated actions cannot be relegated to a shorter time period than that which
was previously agreed to for one of the actions standing alone.
Finally, discovery in these actions is made more difficult because of the
Plaintiffs’ refusal to define the contours of their claim. The Court stated in the decision
denying Defendants’ Motion for a Protective Order that Judge Case noted that the essence of
Plaintiffs’ fraud claim is that NorthWestern "engaged in a knowing and conscious fraudulent
scheme." The problem is the Plaintiffs have never pled what that fraudulent scheme was,
what the object of the fraud was, what fraudulent statements were made, who relied on those
statements and how the fraudulent scheme related specifically to the "going flat transaction"
which is the transaction at the core of the Plaintiffs’ complaint. Answers to these questions
will eliminate some of Plaintiffs’ discovery requests and permit agreement on a discovery
schedule which, while not as accelerated as that demanded by Plaintiffs, maybe somewhat
shorter than that which the Defendants believe is necessary in light of the discovery presently
requested. Discussions of these issues is appropriate at the Rule 16 Conference. See
Fed.R.Civ.P. l6(c)(l) and (2).
As Plaintiffs’ counsel was informed at our October conference, NorthWestem
is prepared to begin shortly production of documents on a rolling basis. The schedule
proposed by Defendants is not interposed for obstruction or delay but is, we believe,
reasonably necessary in order to complete discovery in light of the overwhelming amount of
materials presently demanded by the Plaintiffs.
If Your Honor has any questions with regard to the foregoing, please feel free
to contact me or Joseph D. Pizzurro of the Curtis firm at 212-696-6196.
Respectfully submitted,
Victoria Coun an
Enclosure
cc: Clerk of Court (Via ECF)
Dale R. Dube, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Bonnie Steingart, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Gary L. Kaplan, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Kathleen M. Miller, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Bijan Amini, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Amanda Darwin, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
3189088vl GreenbergTraurig, LLP

Case 1 :04-cv-01494-JJF Document 91 Filed 10/17/2006 Page 3 of 3
The Honorable Joseph J. Faman, Jr.
Page 3 October 17, 2006
John V. Snellings, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Stanley T. Kaleczyc, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Kimberly Beatty, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Denise Seastone Kraft, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Paul Spagnoletti, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Joseph D. Pizzurro, Esq. (Via e·Mail: [email protected])
Steven J. Reisman, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
David A. Jenkins, Esq. (Via E-Mail: daj @skfdelaware.com)
Robert J. Dehney, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Curtis S. Miller, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Jesse H. Austin, III, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Karol K. Denniston, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Joseph D. Pizzurro, Esq. (Via E-Mail: jpizz1u·[email protected])
Steven J. Reisman, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Miriam K. Harwood, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Kerri K. Mumford, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Philip Bentley, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Bonnie Fatell, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
John‘E. James, Esq. (Via E-Mail: [email protected])
Greenberg Traurig, LLP
3 189088vl