Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 9:13 AM To: Bruggers, James Cc: 'Schardein, Bud'; 'Paula Purifoy'; 'Celentano, A.J.' Subject: RE: msd questions
ThefollowingismycommentstotheApril9,2008internalauditreport: 1. IonlyreceivedacopyofitonJune29,2011.Itwasnevershowntomenoranymatter containedthereinbroughttomyattention. Regardingoneormoremissingemployeeinitialsfromabillasimplephonecallwould havecaughtthistypoanditwouldhavebeeneasilycorrected. RegardingnoformalcontracttheZielkeLawFirm,PLLCreceivedanassignmentfrom PZGPofthecontractandsuchassignmentwasprovidedtoMSD.TheZielkeFirmthen receivedanewcontractwithMSDeffectiveJuly1,2008. Regardingminutesofvotingoflawfirmpartnersthisisnotaprocedurethatsmaller lawfirmuse.Indeed,themakingofanonequitypartnerisdoneorally,isbasedupon theirexperience,knowledgeandskill,andreceivesbonusbasedupontheirwork product,whichanassociatedoesnotreceive.Anonequitypartnerisonthesame billinglevelasafullpartner. RegardingkeepingoftimesheetsWedokeepsuchtimesheetsandtheywere providedtoMSD. RegardingCommonwealthRealtyaninvoicewasprovidedtoMSDandthe settlementwasappropriate.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7/1/2011
Glacier
Page 2 of 2
7.
RegardingsuggestedconflictofrepresentationThereisnoconflictbetweenmy serviceasBoardCounselandLitigationCounsel.Mylegalassignmentsaregiventomy firmbytheGeneralCounselatMSDortheExecutiveDirectorortheBoard.Idonot presentissuesorcasesthenrequestthatmyfirmhandlethematter.Infact,asyou shouldknow99%ofmyworkinlitigationisdefensework.Ofcourse,Iupdatethe Boardregularlyonthestatusofdefenselitigation.MSDinhousecounselperform manyservicesthattheyneverinvolvemyfirm.AlltheZielkeLawFirmworkisreviewed thoroughlybyGeneralCounsel,theExecutiveDirectorandtheBoardChairandifthere wasanyquestionaboutthenecessityofsuchworkitwouldhavebeenraisedand resolvedatthetime. RegardingrateschargedtoMSDthepartnerratethatwechargeMSDissignificantly belowthelegalindustrysstandard.Idonotbelievetheauditorhadsufficient informationregardingthelegalfieldandassignmentofpartnersorassociatestocases torenderanyfindingonthisissue.AllourlegalworkisreviewedeverymonthbyMSD andapprovedandnoissueregardingstaffinghaseverbeenraisedwithmyfirm. RegardingMs.Schookshewillrespondseparately.
8.
9.
10. Regardingallegedoverchargefrom2004to2005Therewasabsolutelynoovercharge toMSDofanyamount!Theauditordoesnotspecifyhowshecameupwiththe $149,000figure,doesnotspecifywhosheallegesperformedthework,whatthework consistedor;therefore,thereissimplynofactualbasistosupportthisissue. Onafinalnote:ItiscleartomethatMSDsManagementandBoardneveraccepted theseunsupportedopinions,neverevendiscusseditwithmenorbroughtanyissuesto myattention.Weareproudoftheexcellentworkandresultsthatwehaveperformed forMSDandhavesavedMSDover$30milliondollarsovertheyearsofmy representation.
7/1/2011