Representative Expert Witness & Consulting Work
  1. m Consultant with respect to a class action brought in U.S. bankruptcy court by 40,000 investors who had invested in $1.6 billion of credit-linked notes (“CLNs”) secured by (a) notes issued by a synthetic collateralized debt obligation issuer (a “CDO”) and (b) credit default swaps (“CDS”). The case was brought against the bankrupt sponsor and swap counterparty, its bankrupt parent and the trustee with respect to the CLNs.
  2. Consultant with respect to a class action relating to $1.2 billion of notes issued by a CDO brought in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by the purchasers of the notes against the investment banks that established the CDO and sold its notes. My main issue was whether the underwriters had taken sufficient steps to qualify for a due diligence defense.
  3. Consultant in a class action brought in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against a major bank and numerous large underwriters involving mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) issued by several vehicles established by the bank and securities issued by the bank, most of the assets of which consisted of home mortgages.
  4. Consultant to and potential expert witness for a large investment bank defendant in an arbitration proceeding brought by another large investment bank involving nine CDOs established by the defendant. The proceeding involved the interpretation of the relevant documents and the rights of the plaintiff under those documents, which claimed to have suffered a $130 million loss.
  5. Consultant with respect to an action to be brought in New York State Supreme Court by a large bank that had invested in now-worthless notes issued by two structured investment vehicles (“SIVs”) against the banks that had sponsored the SIVs.
  6. Consultant with respect to a class action to be brought in New York State Supreme Court by investors in two SIVS against the banks that had sponsored the SIVs.
  7. Consultant and potential expert witness with respect to an interpleader action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against a bank that acted as liquidity provider to and purchaser of certain notes issued by a $750 million hybrid CDO and the investment bank that established the CDO, brought by the trustee with respect to the notes.
  8. Consultant relating to a $75 million dispute between a large bank against another large bank that had sold the former several CDOs and CDS.
  9. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in federal court (United States District Court for the Southern District of New York) by a hedge fund against a major bank involving, inter alia, the amount of collateral that the latter could require the former to post with respect to a CDS.
  10. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in the same federal court by the same hedge fund against a different major bank involving issues similar to those described in 9 above.
  11. Consultant to plaintiffs in class action brought in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by investors in a SIV against the sponsor of same and the three major rating agencies.
  12. Consultant to plaintiffs in a separate class action brought in same court against same defendants arising out of similar facts.
  13. Consultant and potential expert witness in an arbitration brought in Michigan by a large public pension fund against two CDOs, their sponsors, and their underwriters, as well as several investment advisers, relating to a $40 million investment involving securities law fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and conflict of interest.
  14. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in a Utah state court by two borrowers against a large bank involving whether the bank had the right to collect damages under an interest rate swap agreement using an ISDA form entered into for the purpose of converting a floating rate interest rate loan into a fixed rate loan when the bank refused to make the loan.
  15. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of NY between a bond insurer and a public authority over whether the latter had correctly calculated a Settlement Amount under an ISDA agreement; although there was no dispute over whether the latter was entitled to a Settlement Amount, the former argued that the latter, although entitled to use “Market Quotation”, should have used “Loss”, which would have resulted in damages far below the $156 million claimed by the latter.
  16. Expert witness in a bankruptcy case in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Although there were many issues involved, the primary issues that I was involved with were whether in fact there had been a “true sale” of receivables by the bankrupt parent to its wholly-owned special purpose entity subsidiary and whether that subsidiary should be consolidated with the parent for the benefit of the parent’s creditors. Wrote two expert reports. Deposed. “Prepped” by counsel to testify; judge decided not necessary to testify, due to judge’s view that expert report was extremely well-written and very easy to understand.
  17. Consultant in a case in Montana in which a bank and a wealthy individual had entered into a loan agreement and an interest rate swap relating to the loan, secured by most of the individual’s real estate and other property; main questions were whether the transaction was appropriate for the individual and consistent with banking practice.
  18. Consultant with respect to a potential case to be brought by a large international bank against another large international bank in connection with a SIV established by the latter; the main issues concerned whether several detrimental amendments to the key documents which were adopted without the consent of the potential plaintiff required such consent and, if not, if there were other bases on which a suit could be brought.
  19. Expert witness on behalf of the defendants in a case brought in a state court in Virginia by a large bank relating to an interest rate swap that was “out of the money” from the standpoint of the defendants. The defendants speak no English and were given no warnings about any risks that they might incur by entering into the swap. My issue was what kind of precautions a bank would normally take before entering into such an arrangement. Wrote expert report.
  20. Expert witness with respect to a class action brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by investors who had invested $154.7 million in CLNs secured by (a) notes issued by a synthetic CDO issuer and (b) CDS. Main issues were whether sponsor had deliberately set up the arrangement to fail, from the investor’s standpoint, and, if so, whether this fact had been disclosed sufficiently. Wrote expert report. Deposed twice.
  21. Consultant and potential expert witness with respect to “put back rights” with respect to numerous non-prime mortgage loans originated and serviced by the client lender which collateralized several dozen MBS transactions. The main question was whether the offering documents failed to make adequate disclosure with respect to a component of the put back rights which would allow the client to repurchase certain of the loans at a price that was less than might have been expected by an investor.
  22. Consultant and potential expert witness in a Texas state court case involving alleged legal malpractice on the part of a major law firm when it failed to amend all relevant provisions in agreements relating to a CDO contemplated by the client, which mistakes cost the client $95 million.
  23. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought by an investor in a CDO against the Collateral Manager of the CDO involving the question of whether the Collateral Manager had bought securities not permitted by the restrictions placed on the Manager by the CDO, as disclosed in the offering materials pursuant to which the investor purchased securities issued by the CDO.
  24. Expert witness on behalf of the defendants in a case brought in a state court in Colorado by a large bank relating to an interest rate swap that was terminated by the bank when the related loan was paid off by the defendants. The bank was seeking a large termination fee despite the fact that the defendants had not asked for an interest rate swap, had no idea how they work and were given no warnings of any kinds about the risks that they might incur by entering into one. The case settled; according to the lawyers who hired me, the settlement was primarily due to my expert report.
  25. Consultant and potential expert witness in an antitrust class action suit brought against several large banks and two non-bank defendants that were accused of conspiring to restrain competition in the market for CDS; damages sought were in the billions of dollars. Wrote expert report.
  26. Consultant for large litigation firm that was considering joining the case described in 25, as co-counsel for plaintiffs.
  27. Consultant in a False Claims Act case brought in the name of the United States in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada against a major participant in the student loan market.
  28. Consultant and potential expert witness in a class action to be brought on behalf of home owners currently in foreclosure suits; main issue was whether the defendant in the class action had standing to bring the foreclosure suits.
  29. Expert witness on behalf of the defendants in a case brought in federal court in New Jersey by a large bank relating to an interest rate swap that was terminated by the bank when the related loan was accelerated due to a loan-to-value default. The bank was seeking a large termination fee despite the fact that the defendants had no idea how swaps work and were given virtually no warnings of any kinds about the risks that the defendants might incur by entering into one. Other issues included whether the related guaranties actually extended to the swap and how to interpret a 50% limitation in the guaranties under the facts of the case. Wrote expert report. Deposed.
  30. Expert witness on behalf of the defendants in a case brought in a state court in Maryland by a large bank relating to an interest rate swap that was terminated by the bank when the related loan was paid off by the defendants. The bank was seeking a large termination fee despite the fact that the defendants had not asked for an interest rate swap, had no idea how they work and were given no warnings of any kinds about the risks that the defendants might incur by entering into one. Wrote expert report.
  31. Consultant hired by a major litigation firm to go through several Pooling and Servicing Agreements and the related prospectuses in order to help the firm figure out a way that the plaintiffs in several cases–minority but significant investors in the relevant RMBS transactions–could overcome motions to dismiss based on a lack of standing.
  32. Consultant and potential expert witness in a class action case brought in federal court in the Southern District of New York by a class of investors claiming that the defendant investment bank had set up two synthetic CDOs designed specifically so that the bank could decrease its overall “long” exposures to MBS via “short” positions on the securities without revealing either (a) that that was what the bank was doing or (b) that the bank was predicting internally that the MBS would soon be worth far less than they were at the time the CDOs were established.
  33. Consultant and potential expert witness in an action brought in federal court in the Southern District of New York by a foreign bank against a large international commercial and investment bank relating to notes sold by a $3 billion CDO established by the defendant; the plaintiff claimed that the CDO was in reality a fraudulent investment vehicle created by the defendant to move mortgages that violated basic underwriting standards off of its balance sheet and onto those of the plaintiff.
  34. Consultant and potential expert witness in an action brought in federal court in the Southern District of New York by a foreign bank against two large underwriters relating to notes sold by a $1.5 billion CDO established by the defendants; the plaintiff claimed that the defendants should have disclosed, inter alia, that, immediately after one of the defendants purchased some of the equity shares issued by the CDO, the defendant on its own books valued the shares at only slightly more than 50% of what it had paid for them.
  35. Consultant and potential expert witness in an action brought in federal court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania by a person who was injured by equipment he had bought that was manufactured by one of the defendants (“Defendant A”), which had bought the rights to manufacture and sell such equipment from one of the other defendants. My issues were whether the due diligence conducted by Defendant A before purchasing these rights deviated in any way from industry custom and practice and whether Defendant A had failed to require that the relevant asset purchase agreement contain terms that under industry custom and practice would normally have been included in such an agreement. Wrote expert report; counsel reported that the report was very important in bringing about a settlement.
  36. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case in the District Court of Douglas County (Omaha), Nebraska. My role has been to help the plaintiff, a family trust, prove that the Bank trying to foreclose on the trust’s property could not be the actual owner of the loan and mortgage relating to the property, which had most likely been sold to a different bank or securitization trust before the proceeding was brought.
  37. Consultant and potential expert witness in a similar case brought in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Columbia County, by a bank against an elderly homeowner. My role was to help the homeowner prove that the bank was not the owner of the relevant property at the time the foreclosure proceedings were begun.
  38. Consultant and potential expert in a similar case brought in the Superior Court of the Judicial District of Waterbury, Connecticut by a securitization trust against an elderly homeowner. My role was to help prove that the trust was never the owner of the loan and mortgage relating to the relevant property.
  39. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in Eldorado County, California Superior Court by a bank against a family trust. My role was to help the trust prove that it had been overcharged by the bank with respect to two interest rate swaps that the trust had entered into in connection with two real estate loans as well as help develop and prove other defenses against the bank’s swaps-related suit.
  40. Consultant and potential expert witness in two cases brought against several very large banks in the Supreme Court of New York County, New York by a former securitization and municipal securities partner in several large, well-known law firms who had developed and patented a methodology based on securitization techniques for the issuance, refunding and/or refinancing of airport special facility bonds. She is alleging that, with respect to some offerings, the banks had used her techniques without paying her any royalties and, with respect to many other offerings, the banks had pressured certain issuers and their counsel not to use her techniques (because the banks’ profits would suffer). My role has been to show that her techniques are standard procedures in the securitization markets and that, had these techniques been used in the offerings in question, I could have rendered non-consolidation, true sale and true lease opinions. The plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of $500 million. Wrote expert report and was deposed.
  41. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in the Supreme Court of Saratoga County, New York against an attorney and his law firm for legal malpractice. The plaintiffs alleged that the malpractice arose out of personal conflicts of interest and professional negligence which compromised defendants’ representation of plaintiffs as personal guarantors of $128 million in commercial mortgage loans. I would have testified, inter alia, that, regardless of plaintiffs’ purported sophistication and experience, defendants, as plaintiffs’ counsel in connection with the subject transactions, were obligated to ensure that plaintiffs fully understood the material terms and risks of those transactions, including the import and mechanics of the special purpose entity (SPE) covenants in the subject loan documents. Wrote declaration. However, the case was settled.
  42. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against a trustee for bonds issued by the plaintiff, a public housing authority. The plaintiff was claiming, inter alia, (a) that the defendant had an obligation to make sure that its outside law firm’s fees, in connection with a suit brought by investors and which defendant unilaterally took from an account containing assets of the plaintiff, were reasonable and (b) that the defendant failed to carry out this obligation. My role would have been to testify, inter alia, that the fees were excessive and unreasonable. Settled before trial.
  43. Consultant and potential expert witness in (a) a case brought by two investors in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against an investment adviser and his employer for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty in the sale of certain securities and related derivatives and (b) a related arbitration not yet filed to be brought against a bank and certain of its affiliates that enabled the adviser to perpetrate the fraud. Settled before trial and arbitration.
  44. Consultant and potential expert witness in a class action brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon by 1,500 investors claiming a loss of over $600 million in connection with notes sold by various related funds. The funds were not defendants; the actual defendants included two major accounting firms, a major law firm, a major financial advisor, and a major rating agency. My main role would have been to show that the law firm did not follow industry-wide due diligence standards in issuing true sale and Investment Company Act opinions and assisting the issuers in obtaining credit lines and drafting disclosure materials relating to the relevant securities. Settled before trial.
  45. Consultant with respect to private placement of token-based notes, utilizing blockchain techniques.
  46. Consultant with respect to private placement of securities to be issued by investment fund to be established to invest in Opportunity Zones.
  47. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in the Superior Court of Suffolk County (Boston), Massachusetts involving securities fraud, legal conflicts of interest and legal malpractice. My role was to state opinions on whether the law firm that had represented both the issuer of the securities as well as the company in which the issuer intended to invest the proceeds of the offering had violated legal ethics rules and/or committed legal malpractice and whether certain facts omitted from the relevant offering materials were “material”. The case was broken into two pieces. I wrote an expert report for each. I would have testified with respect to the first but the court imposed an absolute deadline on the length of the trial and time ran out the day before I would have gone on the stand. The second part of the case was settled shortly after that.
  48. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case in Supreme Court, Queens County, New York. The case involved a potential foreclosure by the trustee of a REMIC trust. My job was to attempt to show that the trust could not be the owner of the mortgage on the property inasmuch as the mortgage was transferred several years after the trust was closed.
  49. Hired as a consultant and potential expert witness to speak to the standard of care for an attorney in advising a client with respect to two transactions, one involving a sale of a business and the other relating to the sale of various products. Both transactions were the subject of a suit in the Circuit Court of Oregon. I wrote two short-form expert reports. An additional suit against the client’s former law firm for malpractice was contemplated. If that suit had been brought, I would have written a full-blown expert report, been deposed and testified. However, both suits were settled (to a great extent because of my two reports, according to the firm that hired me).
  50. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case brought in the Circuit Court of the State of Hawaii’s First Circuit by a homeowner against a securitization trust and several other defendants. My role was to help prove that the trust was the owner of the loan and mortgage relating to the relevant property settled before trial.
  51. Hired as a rebuttal expert by the plaintiffs in a case in the Chancery Court of Delaware aimed at determining the amount a special limited partner in a limited partnership was entitled to receive when property owned by the partnership was sold; my role was to rebut several statements made by a reputed expert hired by the defendants about what certain undefined terms in the limited partnership agreement mean in the real estate/CMBS industry.
  52. Potential expert witness in case involving foreclosure of property by the trustee of an MBS Trust. My role was to state my views on certain questions arising under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
  53. Consultant and potential expert witness in class action case brought in the Circuit Court of Clay County, Missouri. My role will be to discuss the obligations of the various trustees of a securitization trust with respect to loans sold to the trust which potentially violate State and federal laws.
  54. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case in Supreme Court, Kings County, New York. My role would have been to state opinions on whether a loan to the plaintiff was a predatory loan and whether the law firm that had represented both the lender and the borrower violated legal ethics rules and/or committed legal malpractice. Settled before trial.
  55. Consultant to small law firm specializing in real estate as to the rights and responsibilities of one of the firm’s real estate developer clients which had disputes with a large bank under 10 interest rate swap agreements the client had entered into with the bank.
  56. Consultant and potential expert witness on behalf of the plaintiffs in a case brought in state court in California by a revocable trust and its trustees relating to an interest rate swap to the trust that the trust wanted to terminate when it attempted to refinance the related loan. The bank was seeking a large termination fee despite the fact that the plaintiffs had no idea how swaps work and were given virtually no warnings of any kinds about the risks that the plaintiffs might incur by entering into one. Other issues included whether the related guaranties actually extend to the swap and whether the trust was an “eligible contract participant”. Settled before trial.
  57. Rebuttal expert witness in a case brought by a capital advisory firm in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against an hydraulic fracturing company for a “success fee” under an advisory agreement between the two. The former claims that the fee was due when, as a result of its efforts, a “qualified lender” made funds available to the latter. The latter argues that no fee is due because no funding package was actually closed and consummated, despite the fact that the agreement contains no such requirement. Expert report written and delivered. Waiting for deposition stage.
  58. Consultant and potential expert witness in a class action brought in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington by the co-signer on several student loans on behalf of himself and other similarly situated persons. There are a number of issues in the case. My main role will be to argue that the plaintiff’s claims are the same as those of each other member of the class and that those of the defendants that are securitization trusts that allegedly owned and collected on or tried to collect on student loans made to or co-signed by the plaintiff or other members of the class were not actually owned by those trusts. Expert report written and delivered. Waiting for deposition stage.
  59. Consultant and potential expert witness on behalf of the defendants in a case brought in state court in California by two individuals, individually and as trustees of a living trust. The case relates to an interest rate swap with the trust that the trust wanted to terminate when it attempted to refinance the related loan. The initial bank was seeking a large termination fee. The plaintiffs claim that the defendant title insurance company should have warned them about this fee and made sure it was paid at the time of the refinancing. My main role was to explain to counsel and to a judge and/or jury how interest rate swaps work and how and when various fees relating to them are due.
  60. Consultant and potential expert witness in a case in Superior Court, Fairfield County, Connecticut. The case involves a potential foreclosure by the trustee of a REMIC trust. My job is to attempt to show that the trust could not be the owner of the mortgage on the property inasmuch as the mortgage was transferred several years after the trust was closed.
  61. Consultant, rebuttal expert and potential expert witness in a case in the Circuit Court of the Fifth Circuit, State of Hawaii. The case involves a foreclosure action by the trustee of a REMIC trust. My job was to explain how REMICs work and help prove that the trust owns the mortgage. My role ended when the plaintiff won its motion to strike the counterclaim.
  62. Consultant and potential co-counsel in a case brought in the name of the United States in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California against a major insurance company “bailed out” by the U.S., and four major banks and investment banks, involving numerous CDS sold by the insurance company to the banks relating to CDOs, as well as MBS bought by the insurance company primarily from the defendants. Main issues were whether insurance company had any defenses against claims against the CDS, whether banks were aware of the potential defenses, and whether insurance company was involved in fraud in selling the MBS to the U.S. Amount sought was in excess of $100 billion.