Case: 1:19-cr-00864 Document #: 628-1 Filed: 12/07/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:23092
`
`Exhibit A
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cr-00864 Document #: 628-1 Filed: 12/07/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:23093
`
`From:
`To:
`Cc:
`Subject:
`Date:
`
`Richard Finneran
`Madden, Matthew (USAILN)
`Johnston, William (CRM)
`[EXTERNAL] RE: Update
`Thursday, October 26, 2023 2:24:33 PM
`
`Matt,
`
`Just got off the phone with Vicki. In short, it’s complicated, and she won’t be able to get the full details
`together for us before the hearing tomorrow. But she did share a few things that I believe are directly
`responsive to your question about whether, as we argued in our reply, the estimates provided by QE in 2020
`were “reasonable” (which, again, we don’t concede is relevant), which I detail below. Please understand that
`I haven’t yet seen the documents to confirm any of what I summarize below, and Vicki was speaking largely
`from memory, so what I say below is subject to confirmation when she is able to get me a complete set of
`supporting documents.
`
`
`First, HH agreed to a cap on their fees with Mr. Shah related to the criminal case. That cap was $6.5
`million. Mr. Shah did not have the means to pay that amount at the time the representation was
`initiated, so they accepted a smaller retainer to commence their work with the expectation that the
`additional monies would be paid as Mr. Shah’s liquidity increased. HH received about $4 million as a
`partial retainer for Mr. Shah’s representation in the criminal case in July 2020 (not including $2 million
`that was sent to HH and then transferred directly to Ms. Agarwal’s counsel), but Vicki is going to have
`to go back to see how much of that roughly $4 million was booked as a reserve for fees and how
`much of it was a reserve for costs.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` I
`
`Second, the criminal representation wound up going significantly over the $6.5 million budget. Based
`upon their records, HH incurred additional fee-earner time on the matter over and above the cap,
`equating to about $1.6 million. (Vicki wasn’t sure whether that sum was based upon HH’s market rates
`or if there was an hourly discount baked in anywhere; she will work to confirm.)
`
`Third, the $6.5 million cap covered fees only, not costs and expenses, and Mr. Shah was expected to
`pay for costs and expenses as they were incurred if they went over whatever reserve was set up from
`the initial July payment. Some of those costs and expenses were paid directly to vendors while others
`were paid through HH, so it will take some effort to determine the total amount incurred, but she was
`confident that the costs and expenses totaled well over $500,000. Vicki also mentioned that HH
`leaned on its relationships with vendors to negotiate steep discounts on the expenses (she estimated
`an average discount of 15%), and that if those costs were valued at normal market rates, they would
`have been much higher.
`
`Finally, the $6.5 million cap did not cover additional work that HH wound up doing with respect to the
`SEC case. Mr. Shah paid additional amounts to cover fees and expenses for that matter as well, but
`that work was billed hourly and there was no cap on those fees or expenses (at least as far as Vicki
`was aware). Going back to sort out which expenses related to which matter will, again, take some
`time.
`
` know that is only part of what you asked for. But the bottom line is that, based upon the actual amount of
`time that HH put into the matter, HH’s representation cost at least $8.1 million (exclusive of costs and
`expenses), $6.5 million of which was paid by Mr. Shah, and the remaining $1.6 million+ of which had to be
`eaten by HH. In our view, that is sufficient to show that QE’s $14-15 million estimate for both Mr. Shah’s and
`Ms. Agarwal’s representation was, if anything, an underestimate of the fees and expenses that would
`actually have been required.
`
`It doesn’t sound like Vicki will be able to get me much more additional information before we are set to be in
`court tomorrow, but hopefully that gives you what you need in order to be able to assess whether you will
`continue to challenge the reasonableness of QE’s fee estimate.
`
`
`
`Case: 1:19-cr-00864 Document #: 628-1 Filed: 12/07/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:23094
`
`
`Lastly, I am going to try to get information from Mr. Shah today about the other expenses you cited in your
`3:00pm email yesterday, but it may not be this evening until I am able to connect with him.
`
`Thanks! Hope this helps.
`
`
`
`RICHARD E. FINNERAN
`Partner
`BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP - St. Louis, MO USA
`richard.finneran@bclplaw.com
`T: +1 314 259 2080
`
`
`From: Madden, Matthew (USAILN) <Matthew.Madden@usdoj.gov>
`Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2023 12:49 PM
`To: Richard Finneran <Richard.Finneran@bclplaw.com>; Johnston, William (CRM) <William.Johnston4@usdoj.gov>
`Subject: RE: Update
`
`Thx for update.
`
`From: Richard Finneran <Richard.Finneran@bclplaw.com>
`Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2023 12:48 PM
`To: Madden, Matthew (USAILN) <MMadden@usa.doj.gov>; Johnston, William (CRM) <William.Johnston4@usdoj.gov>
`Subject: [EXTERNAL] Update
`
`
`Matt, fyi, I’ve just been scheduled to talk to Vicki in about 30 mins. I know we’re past noon, but I hope to at least have
`an update for you after that call. Thanks for your patience.
`
`RICHARD E. FINNERAN
`Partner
`richard.finneran@bclplaw.com
`T: +1 314 259 2080
`
`
`This electronic message is from a law firm. It may contain confidential or privileged information. If you received this transmission in error, please reply to the
`sender to advise of the error and delete this transmission and any attachments.
`
`We may monitor and record electronic communications in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Where appropriate we may also share certain
`information you give us with our other offices (including in other countries) and select third parties. For further information (including details of your privacy rights
`and how to exercise them), see our updated Privacy Notice at www.bclplaw.com.
`
`This electronic message is from a law firm. It may contain confidential or privileged information. If you received this transmission in error, please reply to the
`sender to advise of the error and delete this transmission and any attachments.
`
`We may monitor and record electronic communications in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Where appropriate we may also share certain
`information you give us with our other offices (including in other countries) and select third parties. For further information (including details of your privacy rights
`and how to exercise them), see our updated Privacy Notice at www.bclplaw.com.
`
`
