Respectfully submitted,
Lawrence R. Velvel
MassachusettsSchool of Law
500 Federal StreetAndover, MA01810
Tel: (978) 681-0800
Fax: (978) 681-6330
Email: Velvel@mslaw.edu
Dated: September 29, 2009
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
)
In re: ) SIPA LIQUIDATION
) No. 08-01789 (BRL)
BERNARD L. MADOFF INVESTMENT )
SECURITIES LLC, )
)
Debtor. )
)
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
1. Recipients Of Document Request.
This simplified and streamlined request for production of documents is directed to (a) the Securities Investor Protection Corporation and all of its officers, employees, directors, personnel, representatives, agents, and hired organizations or persons, and (b) the SIPC Trustee and all of his employees, personnel, representatives, agents, and hired organizations or persons.
2. Requested Documents.
All documents relating to any reason or reasons for or against using or not using, or relating to the decision on whether to use or not use, any of the following methods for determining an investor's net equity in the Madoff case:
1. The cash-in minus cash-out method;
2. The amount shown owing to an investor on his/her November 30, 2009 statement from Madoff;
3. The cash-in plus interest minus cash-out method;
4. Any other method.
3. Definition.
"Documents" includes records; books; papers; emails; electronic messages of any kind; transcriptions; tapes; videotapes; disks; recordings; copies, drafts, reproductions no matter how produced or reproduced; contracts; memoranda; invoices; correspondence; notes; minutes of any meetings, including meetings with agents or employees; instructions; guides; compilations of rules, regulations, or policies; daybooks; calendars; photographs; telegrams; messages; drawings; charts; graphs; other writings; recording tapes; recording discs; mechanical or electronic information storage or recording elements; and any other "documents" as that word is defined in Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Respectfully submitted,
Lawrence R. Velvel
MassachusettsSchool of Law
500 Federal StreetAndover, MA01810
Tel: (978) 681-0800
Fax: (978) 681-6330
Email: Velvel@mslaw.edu
Dated: September 29, 2009
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that I have caused the foregoing Notification to the Court of Request for Production of Documents and a Request For Production of Documents to be served on persons listed below by first class mail, postage prepaid, on this 29th day of September, 2009.
_________________________________
Lawrence R. Velvel
Josephine Wang, Esq.
Securities Investor Protection Corp.
805 15th Street, N.W., Suite 800Washington, DC20005-2207
Stephen P. Harbeck
President
Securities Investor Protection Corp.
805 15th Street, N.W., Suite 800Washington, DC20005-2207
David J. Sheehan, Esq.
Baker & Hostetler, LLP
45 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY10111
Helen Chaitman, Esq.
Phillips Nizer, LLP
666
Fifth AvenueNew York, NY10103
Jonathan M. Landers, Esq.
Milberg LLP
One PennsylvaniaPlaza
New York, NY10119
Brian Neville, Esq.
Lax & Neville LLP
1412 Broadway,
Suite 1407New York, NY10018
[1] Objector's claim has been designated by the Trustee as "Combined Claim" numbers 10963 and 11245.
[2] E.g., circumstances where a fraud is exposed after only one month, no interest or profit has yet been credited to investors, no statements have been received by them, some of them withdrew part of their money during the one month that the fraud was in existence and cash-in/cash-out is not used to benefit or save SIPC or its management. In such a case, cash-in/cash-out would seem appropriate.
[3] That SIPC and the Trustee would have nothing to fear from the documents if they were to show that the improper purpose under discussion played no role in the decision to use cash-in/cash-out, makes one wonder why SIPC and the Trustee would object to the requested production, which would benefit them, at least to the extent of eliminating a dispositive point against them. One understands, however, that wholesale objections to any and all discovery, no matter how warranted the discovery may be, is the way the "game has been played" in "big time litigation" for at least 45 to 50 years.
