Free Statement - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

EXHIBIT A
Case 2:02—cv—02313—ROS Document 113-2 Filed 08/08/2005 Page1 0f4

_ _ CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT E
l IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
I FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

1 The United States of )
E America for the benefit and ) Videotape
' use of EPC CORPORATION, an ) Deposition of:
lArizona corporation, )
) CURTIS WILLIAMS
Plaintiff, )
)
A vs. ) O2—CV—23I3 PHX ROS .
)
TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND ) Volume IV
SURETY COMPANY OF AMERICA, )
a Connecticut corporation, )
)
Defendant. )
)
And All Related Proceedings )
December 2, 2004 * 9:05 a.m. §
l
Location: Snell and Wilmer [
15 W. South Temple, Suite 1200 {
_ Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 l
l
Reporter: Dawn M. Davis, RPR
Notary Public in and for the State of Utah E
1
l l
i...-...ee eeee .. . ..... _... .
l C C l
l A‘f{`I'— -*?J;g§¥£*
I - » ·····* — '[" °C
C ‘ **' hb,. 0UI't, LLC M my vm T
i ’¤··~>¤¤··<··=*‘·~¤¤R¤¤P 5.... ISL';1i,;?j‘;;.;.;1‘§;;..,,, l
asg 3+s=aes—o¤cmnen%”H§~é%r?`?"i“"·’wi£é‘68/08/2005 pa g 2 ¤f`*2¢·§‘**·*5i‘2·"""" i

The United States of America vs. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America
Curtis Williams, Vol. Ill * December 2;,2904
193 199
1 Q. No. No there was a-- l in work were discovered there were no subsequent
2 A. I don't know what the--I don't know what 2 default notices or cure notices sent to EPC.
3 they contributed, no. 3 A. There were notifications sent to EPC
4 Q. You weren't involved in that? 4 related to the deficiencies discovered, particularly
5 A. No, sir. 5 in the overexcavation. There was a section of water
6 Q. Has there a set amount of money that was 6 pipe that we discovered, but other than the rest of
1 available for you to finish the project? 1 it was we discovered it, you know, there was an
8 A. I don't believe so, no. I don't believe 8 accounting process, the costs were tracked. _
9 there was any funds earmarked, you know, I--not to my 9 Q. For example, the mass grading, that's by
10 recollection—-or not to my knowledge. _ 10 far your largest backcharge.
11 Q. Now, 1 am looking at the subcontract 11 A. That's correct.
12 that's Exhibit 2. The termination provision, 12 Q. There was no cure notice sent to EPC for
13 paragraph ten, says--I an paraphrasing now--Beneco 13 the mass grading, right?
14 may, if it has cause, terminate for default at any 14 A. No, there was no cure notice sent.
15 time after serving three calendar days notice of such 15 Q. And isn't it true that Mr. Shaw told you
16 default to the subcontractor. 16 after the termination EPC would be willing to go back
11 Do you see where l've paraphrased that? 11 to the project and correct any deficiencies that were
18 A. Yes. 18 discovered?
19 Q. Had a termination information default been 19 A. I don't recall that, but I don't know how
20 exercised here by Beneco, the subcontractor, EPC, 20 we would have a contractor cone to site without a
21 would have had a three-day period to cure the 21 contract. =
22 default, correct? 22 Q. I an not asking how you would do it.
23 A. That's correct. 23 lsnlt it true that he told you.that?
24 Q. Am 1 correct that with regard to any of 24 . A. No, I don't recall him telling me that.
25 the book charges and deficiencies that are being 25 . Q. 1sn't it true that he wrote to you with
198 200
1 claimed against EPC now, there was never a three-day 1 regard to at least some of the deficiencies?
2 cure notice sent to EPC? 2 A. Just related to the water line deficiency,
3 A. we sent two notices, two show cause 3 there was some correspondence back and forth on the
4 notices, to EPC in--I believe it was in December 4 water line.
5 advising them that they=were-—they needed to remedy 5 Q. He-did offer to fix the water line.
6 their schedule and their workmanship issues or would 6 A. He said he would come up and fix the water
1 be in default of the contract. 1 line.
8 Q. But with regard to the specific 8 Q. And you did not take him up on that offer?
_ 9 backcharges and deficiencies, you never sent any 9 A. No. I think there was about a $2,000 `
10 three—day cure notices, did you? 10 effort related to that.
11 A. The contract was terminated. Most of the 11 Q. 1 am going to mark the next exhibit as a _
12 deficiencies discovered were discovered some five, 12 group exhibit. These are five monthly reports
13 six months after termination. 13 from-—let‘s go off the record for a second.
14 Q. And as to those, you had--because you had 14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: He are going off the
15 terminated for convenience you never sent out any 15 record. The time is 3:40.
16 three—day cure notices, correct? 16 {A break was taken from 3:40 to 3:48 p.m.}
13 A. In accordance with the contract. The 11 (EXHIBIT-188 WAS MARKED.)
18 contract had been terminated. 18 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are going back on
19 Q. All you've got to do is just answer the 19 the record. The time is 3:48.
20 question yes. lt may be obvious but if you can 20 Q. (BY HR. MANN) We have marked as a group
21 answer the question we'll get through this a lot 21 exhibit, Exhibit 188. The first document in this
22 quicker. 22 group exhibit is a monthly project report dated
23 A. Okay, bear with me then. 23 September 2001. lt says it was prepared by you,
24 Q. And my question is, is after EPC was 24 Mr. Williams. ls that correct?
25 terminated for convenience and alleged deficiencies 25 A. Yes.
CitiC0urt, LLC "
8OL5323441
Case 2:02—cv—02313—ROS Document 113-2 Filed 08/08/2005 Page 3 of 4

The United States of America vs. Travelers Casualty aud Surety Company of America
_ Curtis Williams, Vol. IH * December 2, 2004
JE57
1 just to back up; that's the critical payment list
2 that occurred prepetition. what was your i REPORTERIS CERTIFICATE
3 understanding ot the critical vendor list or critical Z
1 vendor order that was negotiated and approved after 3 STATE OF UTAH l ee.
5 the bankruptcy was filed? T COUNTY OF SALT LAKE J _ e_e _
6 A. My understanding was that the bankruptcy e Eigarrgg g;e;&3E;§§e?geii;1ié gigiigirigapsliigsgiudl
1 court was supervising the release of funds and would 7 ' eeee'ee eeeeeeee ee eeeee eeeee ee eeeee
8 ”°* ¥°1°°S° °“Y f““d‘ fs *‘"Y'°h1‘“1 ***1** **1*1*1 B ii.’§2’¥i"§$‘..;"tJ’%ET‘i*ins‘°r;3t§?*i1.l‘i.t.iiE.?$t.“;2§.déill
9 projects that were bonded and were determined to be 9 sssnses out sos ssssnr
10 critical in order to keep the projects moving in 10 eeeeeeee ee geseesegesgeeeeeeyeeeegeegeeegeez? was
11 ssdss 1=¤ ¤¤n¤1sss the ¤¤¤1¤¤ss1- i. trssszrrztrrnsss nr; ;;rlts.;rr:·szrsfsrrtsrt
12 Q. How nuch——how much day-to-day knowledge 12 Ptscsdinq Ps¤ss=
13 sis vos hsvs sf its ssntrsntsvl is ......rE;°t..;i§ ;§s;‘?sQc€..:1t§‘r§;;i i2‘i.La:‘;..a
14 A- 1·irs1ss¤1· Yss knss. I wss¤‘t rssidsnt is ll ;t3?s§“§s§1”s2*i§5;E;a tifs;’;*a?"ni..§‘?2i“;;*z§tZ;;inr..
15 the Grand Canyon. The only information I had was 15 I fut,hEI certify that , am not k,n De
16 what wss bsinq downloaded ts ss sithsr in chorus is E§L‘5:`;"§,$‘Z.2ii2§i2§.'§"J;;t“Iit ?.5r“‘2‘ir§i;§l§§ E2 ii?
11 calls. There were some communiqués I believe sent 17 °““°°“° ““Q“°°f‘
18 out in e-mail form but it was limited, you know, the is zvrn day of ZLEEEEZETYZESSF AND OFFICIAL BEAL this
19 information that came out. I believe Tom Dillon made is
20 a best effort to keep all the project sites informed zo
21 as much as possible so that they could move their zi
22 projects forward. 22
23 Q. But you weren't in constant communication as 5;e;e§.eE;yy;. nes.
24 with, say, Beneco's bankruptcy lawyers? as sessoloa in Bevis Gountv
25 A. No, absolutely not. as
366
1 Q. Do you know when the critical vendor order
2 was entered in the bankruptcy case-in terms of or in
3 relation to the termination ot EPC‘s contract, was it
4 before, was it after?
5 A. It was after their termination.
6 MR. ARANBURU: .That‘s all I have. Thanks,
1 Mr. Nilliams. - ~
8 THE WITNESS: Thank you. ·
9 MR. MANN: No more questions.
10 NR. CSONTOS: 0ave?
11 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This ends the ,
12 deposition of 0. Curtis Nilliams. We are going off
13 the record. The time is 8:11.
14 (Deposition concluded at 8:11 p.w.)
15 s t it
16
1T
18 ‘
19
20
21
22
23
21
25
CitiCourt, LLC I
8OL5323441
Case 2:02—cv—02313—ROS Document 113-2 Filed 08/08/2005 Page 4 of 4

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 113-2

Filed 08/08/2005

Page 1 of 4

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 113-2

Filed 08/08/2005

Page 2 of 4

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 113-2

Filed 08/08/2005

Page 3 of 4

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 113-2

Filed 08/08/2005

Page 4 of 4