What's New | Congress Must End "Underwriting" Sallie Mae

WHAT'S NEW IN THE HALLIBURTON CASE

Truth in Corporate Justice LLC:
Lead Plaintiff Will Substitute Counsel in Halliburton (NYSE:HAL)
Securities Litigation

This is an update concerning the Halliburton Securities Litigation. Truth in Corporate Justice LLC (“TCJ”) is Special Counsel to the AMS Fund, Inc. on Securities Matters.

On November 22, 2006, the Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund, Inc. (“AMS Fund”) moved for an order substituting counsel in a consolidated class action against Halliburton, Inc. (NYSE: HAL), in which AMS Fund serves as sole Lead Plaintiff representing more than 800,000 absent class members. After months of attempting to amicably resolve its differences with the law firms of Lerach, Coughlin, Stoia, Geller, Rudman & Robbins, LLP (“Lerach Coughlin”), of San Diego and Scott + Scott, LLC (“Scott + Scott”), of Colchester, Conn. (collectively referred to as “Co-Lead Counsel”), AMS Fund was forced to seek the replacement of these firms as lead counsel in this case. Truth in Corporate Justice LLC, Special Counsel to the AMS Fund, stated that this is an unfortunate but necessary change that was unexpected at the time Mr. Lerach’s firm first intervened in this case.

AMS Fund’s Special Counsel and former lead counsel Neil Rothstein tried for months to guide the parties in a most professional and ethical manner so as to not impede direct, productive contact between Lead Plaintiff and its Co-Lead Counsel. Over the last few months, AMS Fund asked Scott + Scott several times (and the Lerach firm once) for copies of all correspondence, but such requests were refused. AMS Fund also advised Scott + Scott of its concerns about Lerach Coughlin continuing as lead counsel while the Department of Justice is concurrently investigating both Halliburton and Mr. Lerach (a fact which Mr. Lerach did not disclose to AMS Fund, and which AMS Fund only learned of through the press). AMS Fund requested only that Mr. Scott submit a plan of how to proceed, thus allowing Lerach Coughlin to withdraw quietly, and only requested the Court’s substitution of counsel when Lerach Coughlin refused to do so. Scott + Scott now seeks to usurp the role of its client in favor of three absent class members brought in by Lerach who only showed interest in this case after it had been filed for over two years.

On November 21, 2006, in response to AMS Fund’s concerns, Lerach and Scott “invited” Paula N. John, the president of the AMS Fund, to meet with them at such convenient locations and times as “November 28, 2006, in the early morning or late afternoon—preferably at the Minneapolis Airport” or more interestingly, “…Friday, December 1, 1006,” in San Diego. Co-Lead Counsel never even suggested meeting in AMS Fund’s boardroom in Milwaukee.

AMS Fund and others were concerned that Lerach and Scott stated that they would “arrange the presence of retired Federal Judge Lawrence Irving,” who had joined Lerach’s firm as an attorney and Joe Kendall, “a retired federal judge and local counsel in this case who knows Judge Lynn and the Dallas federal courthouse quite well.” This statement demonstrates a course of disturbing behavior and veiled threats, as Judge Irving had served or still does serve as Guardian Ad Litem for the Court and Class, and Judge Kendall acted as AMS Fund’s liaison counsel earlier in the litigation (when a judge is acting in another capacity the title should not be used). Please note that it was Co-Lead Counsel, Lerach and Scott, who put the correspondence referencing the Court and Judges Irving and Kendall into the record, thus making the statement public. AMS Fund had no intention of making any of this public unless it had to be made available and it should have remained confidential.

The AMS Fund does not accept this comment by Lerach as reflecting the views of the Court. It has great faith, deference and trust in the independence of the Honorable Barbara M. G. Lynn and found Lerach's characterizations disrespectful to the Court and to the purported class. Therefore, Lerach and Scott must depart this case for having such disrespect and further, it is unfortunate that Judges Kendall and Irving were mentioned in this light (they were copied on the letter, and have never stated their opposition to such a comment). AMS Fund now understands their conflicts, as both former judges work either for or with Lerach’s law firm. Mr. Lerach had an obligation to disclose to the Court all capacities in which they have served or serve Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach or its successor firms during this litigation. While no harm has come upon the class, it would become impossible for any independent lead plaintiff to fully protect the due process rights of all absent class members if such behavior continues.

As stated in its Reply Brief filed recently, and as summarized in the Fortune.com article published recently (available at http://money.cnn.com/blogs/legalpad), the firms of Lerach Coughlin and Scott + Scott face insurmountable conflicts of interest and/or breaches of important fiduciary duties to AMS Fund and the Class, which make it impossible for these firms to continue to serve as Co-Lead Counsel or to continue to litigate this action. In fact, as TCJ has learned, there may be conflicts that should have been disclosed by Lerach that could have an impact on many cases. It is fortunate that the Lead Plaintiff here took the aggressive steps necessary to protect the class.

Co-Lead Counsel’s conflicts are further amplified by Mr. Lerach seeking the spotlight in the Enron Securities Litigation, in which the AMS Fund is a Certified Class Representative for the Debt Bondholders. In the news recently, the Honorable Melinda Harmon ordered Lerach, in an unprecedented situation, to pay the costs and legal fees of a defendant bank for continuing to prosecute claims against that defendant even after the point where they had shown the claims to be without merit. Lerach allegedly went to defendant’s attorneys and brokered a deal that served only his best interest: he would not appeal Judge Harmon’s decision as long as he did not have to pay these fees or costs as ordered by that Court.

AMS Fund will not allow any attorney that represents it to usurp the power of the court; it also has no intention of leaving the Enron case. Enron is different than Halliburton: in the case of Halliburton, the conflict exists that the U.S. Government is investigating Lerach and investigating a company where the sitting Vice President was chief executive officer during the class period. This situation, which raises a conflict, will probably never occur again. It should be noted that the Vice President is not a defendant in this action.

AMS Fund was the only investor to oppose the previous inadequate settlement of the Halliburton action and it has always acted to promote the best interests of the Class. It will not waiver from this course under any circumstances. AMS Fund has taken these necessary measures to protect and preserve the interest of the Class and is seeking the substitution of Boies, Schiller & Flexner as Lead Counsel in this action, and there will be no additional, duplicative fees or costs. TCJ’s Neil Rothstein will remain in the case as Special Counsel to the Lead Plaintiff.

As with all actions taken by AMS Fund in prosecuting this class action, the substitution of counsel was not made in haste and only after consultation with various experts and trusted others. Contrary to current Co-Lead Counsel’s position, this necessary change will serve to promote the best interests of the Class by limiting costs, expenses and ultimate delay. As admitted by current Co-Lead Counsel, the case has not progressed lately (On November 10, 2006, Mr. Scott characterized the case as being in “limbo”). Therefore, Lead Plaintiff finds this the perfect time to change counsel, especially as current Co-Lead Counsel continue to violate Pre-Trial Order No. 2 by failing to turn over requested documentation (the Lead Plaintiff had requested to see all correspondence) and take direction from the Lead Plaintiff. The requested substitution will provide the Class with counsel who faces no conflicts of interest, who are attentive to Lead Plaintiff’s direction, and who are diligent in responding to the requests of Lead Plaintiff.

For further information please contact:

Neil Rothstein
Truth in Corporate Justice LLC
(800) 610-4998
nrothstein@worldwidetree.org

ABOUT TRUTH IN CORPORATE JUSTICE LLC

Truth in Corporate Justice LLC (www.worldwidetree.org) is a limited liability company under the umbrella of the Worldwide Tree Group that scrutinizes, supports, and endorses law firms that adhere to and are dedicated to the highest ethical, competency and zealous advocacy in order to maintain integrity in our legal system. It has started the practice of “L.E.O.” or Litigation Ethics Oversight. The group consists of TCJ, the Global Governance Center LLC, and Class in Action LLP—WWT’s law center. Additionally, the Group will begin growing its unique Worldwide Tree Multimedia LLC. You may contact Truth in Corporate Justice LLC at (310) 459-2560 or (800) 610-4998 or Neil Rothstein (nrothstein@worldwidetree.org) directly at (619) 251-0887. TCJ is a limited liability company that will scrutinize, support, and endorse those law firms that adhere to TCJ’s ethical and competency standards in order to maintain the integrity of the legal system within the United States. TCJ seeks to empower anyone facing problems in our ever-changing world through education, access, guidance, networking, representation, and more.

TCJ also sponsors the website www.halliburtonsecuritieslitigation.com which is dedicated to updating the public on the ongoing securities litigation against Halliburton Corporation. Mr. Rothstein currently serves as Special Counsel to the Lead Plaintiff in the landmark case where it was proven that one lone voice can make a difference.

The Worldwide Tree Group is non-partisan with no political, religious or other affiliation except to bring together differing philosophies, views and backgrounds in order to find solutions to the many critical challenges that people are facing today. Any organization or person may join and take part in the offerings of the various companies within the WWT except those who or which supports or advocates violence or terrorism.