Free Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 293-3

Filed 03/15/2005

Page 1 of 3

SALTMANSTEVENS~ & P.C.
1801 Street, N.W., K Suite M-110, Washington, 20005 D.C. (202)452-2140 Fax:(202)775-8217 Email: rgoeken@sed~:manand stevens, corn

February 14, 2005 VIA EMAIL DavidA. Harrington, Esq. U.S. Departmentof Justice CommercialLitigation Branch Civil Division Atm: Classification Unit 1100L Street, N.W., 8t~ Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Re: Dear David: This letter will memorializeour telephone conversation of today which focused on the matters raised in your letter that wasfaxed to us on the afternoon of Friday, February, 11, 2005. I will address each point in the order that it wasraised in your letter: Point 1 - Robert Ness: As we discussed, Precision Pine will produce Mr. Ness for deposition any day during the week of February 21, 2005 in Eugene, Oregon, except Wednesday, February23, 2005. Weare flexible as to the lo6afion of the deposition in Eugene,and note that there is a U.S. Forest Service office in Eugenethat mayhave a roomavailable. Please contact us at your earliest convenienceto finalize the details about Mr. Ness's deposition. In response to your inquiry with respect to the documents used by Mr. Ness in preparing his most recent report, I identified the following documents you that Mr. Ness has indicated to that he relied on. In his cover letter dated February7, 2005, Mr. Ness's phrase "Internal Financial Statements for the FYE 3/31/98 - FYE 3/31/01," as one would expect, refers to: For FYE3/31/97 and 3/31/98 Lead Schedules for Sales Revenue, Other Income, Other Expense, Cost of Sales, General and Administrative Expenses, IncomeTax Expense prepared by Precision Pine's accountants, Baldwin Jones & Co. "Reviewed Fhianciai Statement Precision Pine and Timber, Inc. Financial Statements for the Years EndedMarch31, I998 and 1997" prepared by Precision Pine's accountants, Baldwin Jones & Co. Precision Pine & Timber. Inc. v. United States, CoFC No. 98-720C

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 293-3

Filed 03/15/2005

Page 2 of 3

David A, Harrington, Esq. U.S. Deparmaent Justice of February I4, 2005 Page 2

For FYE3/31/99-3/31/01 In these years, no reviewed financial statements were prepared and Mr. Ness used Precision Pine and Timber, Inc. Financial Statements for the Years EndedMarch31, 1999, 2000 and 2001. In Mr. Ness's cover letter, his phrase "The LumberInvoices from post-suspension the period" is self-explanatory and includes year-end inventory stunmaries in the post-suspension period. In Mr. Ness's cover letter his phrase "TSSAs the BreachedContracts" is selffor explanatory and refers to the TimberSale Statements of Accountprepared by the Forest Service. In Mr. Ness's cover letter, his phrase "Precision Pine Sales Journals for 1997-2000" is self-explanatory and includes the Winslow Heberjournals. and All of these docuraents have been madeavaJJable to the governmentfor inspection and copying during discovery in this case, and, of course, the TSSAs documentsoriginally are prepared by the Forest Service. Weare currently in the process of preparing copies of documents use as exhibits at trial, whichwill likely include at least someof these documents for and I reiterate myoffer to provide copies of those documents identified above that you catmot readily locate in your flies. Point 2 - MartinDevere: ~ informed you that Mr. Devere has been unabIe to secure the release of any other portions of the Beck Report, whichis proprietary. We believe that Mr. Deveremaytestify as to that portion of the Beck Report whichhas been provided and/or that he mayalso offer those opinions in his expert report that do not rely on the Beck Report. Point 3 - Doug McDonald TimberData Co.: Mr. McDonaldhas identified the and post-suspension timber sale offerings that were madeon the relevant National Forests in Region 3 in 1996-1998.(In fact, this information regarding fmaber sales offered in December 1996 of and all of 1997 was provided to the government Precision Pine's Appendix its Responseto in to the Government'sMotion for Summary Judgment). As part of his routine business activities, Mr. McDonald provided with this information by the Forest Service during those years. was Accordingly,as this is essentially the Forest Service's owndata, I havelittle doubtthat wewill be able to stipulate to the pertinent facts about these timber sale offerings and, as requested, I will provide you with a proposed stipulation to accomplishbefore March10, 2005.

Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 293-3

Filed 03/15/2005

Page 3 of 3

David A. Harrington, Esq. U.S. Departmentof Justice Febroary 14, 2005 Page 3

As you requested, the address for TimberData Co. is: 576 Olive Street, #303, Eugene, Oregon 97440. Point 4 - ErrataSheets: Enclosed with your letter were errata sheets for Messrs. Maurer, Panks, and Adldns. As we discussed, to the extent that we were previously given these errata sheets as provided for by Rules of the Court of Federal Claims, we will have no objection to appropriate, non-substantive corrections madeby the deponents. I further note, however, that Mr. Adldns'serrata sheet was not signed within 30 days of the notice of the availability of his deposition as is required by the rules and is, therefore, inva/id. Point 5 - Verification of Intcrro~,atorv Answers: As we discussed, Precision Pine is willing to verify its answers. Wealso reiterate our long-standing request that the government do the samewith respect to its answers to Precision Pine's discovery requests, whichwe anticipate including on our preliminary exhibit list. Please advise me whenthe governmenthas accomplishedits verification so that we mayexchangeverifications. Point 6 - Stipulations of Fact: I have only had a chance to review briefly the proposed stipulations you provided on Friday. I was disappointed, however, that vh-mally none of the stipulations that Precision Pine had proposedlast October, that I thought to be quite innocuous, were included. I do appreciate your stated willingness to reconsider Precision Pine's proposed stipulations and I will be contacting you about themin the near future. Point 7- Stipulations as to Documents:I a/so appreciate your suggestion that we stipulate as to authenticity/admissibility of certain documents.Mycurrent preference wouldbe that wewait and see what documents on the proposed/finai witness lists and then stipulate to are the au~anticity/admissibility of these documents the greatest extent possible. tp ~ in closing, I believe our conversation today was productive. IfI have inadvertently not accurately stated the substance of our conversation or have omitted somethingyou believe to be /mpertant, please let me know. Verytruly yours, SALTMAN STEVENS, P.C. &

RWG/ecf