Opinion
No. 02-CV-8993 (LAK).
February 8, 2005
MAYER, BROWN, ROWE MAW LLP, Wayne C. Matus, A. John P. Mancini, New York, NY, Attorneys for Plaintiffs
EDWARD F. WESTFIELD, P.C. Edward F. Westfield, Jr., Esq., New York, NY, Attorneys for Defendant Randy Johnson
STIPULATION AND ORDER
WHEREAS on December 10, 2004, Plaintiffs moved this Court for an Order to compel the production of certain documents, including electronic documents, within the possession, custody, or control of Defendant Randy L. Johnson, Jr. (the "Motion to Compel");
WHEREAS Defendant Randy Johnson has agreed to stipulate to certain relief requested in Plaintiffs' Motion, on the condition that the United States Attorney, with jurisdiction over a certain pending criminal investigation into certain of the Defendants in this case, does not object to such production; and
WHEREAS the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York has indicated that it has no objection to the production of the requested documents, provided that: (i) such documents relate only to Defendants Lateko Bank and/or Parex Bank; and (ii) the United States Attorney's Office be permitted sufficient time to review any disclosures by Defendant Johnson prior to their turnover; NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, that:
(1) Defendant Randy Johnson shall produce, by February 11, 2005, all documents in his possession, custody, or control that respond to, relate to, or in any way discuss: (i) the allegations in the Third Amended Complaint; (ii) the Document Requests previously propounded upon Defendant Johnson; and (iii) the documents requested at the depositions taken, to date, of Defendant Johnson, provided, however, that: (a) such documents relate to Defendant Lateko Bank or Defendant Parex Bank, including, but not limited to, their parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, employees, consultants, agents, or representatives; and (b) such documents have been reviewed by the Office of the United States Attorney prior to such production; and
(2) The Motion to Compel, dated December 10, 2004, shall be deemed withdrawn, without prejudice to renew at a later date.