Page 17 - RICHERT V. WGA - JUDGE WEST JAN 10 2010

14

'l I -. I'II --
HAVE GOTIIO TO BRING IN I INTEIID

2 TO IIOVE THIS AT
COURT SOI.IE POINT TO HAVE I.IR, JASKO BECOIIE

3
FORIIALLY ENGAGED WITH RESPECT TO THE D.G.A. I
BECAUSE

4 CAI{'T GET ANSW€RS TO THESE QUESTIOI.IS. WHEN I
ASK COUTISEL
5 TO PROVIDE
I,IE WITII FURTHER INFORI.IATTON, THEY WON'T GIVE

6 T}IE}I IO ME.

I'!I
7
NOT AN EXPERT IN
THE FINAiICES OF
I
t
COLLECTION SOCIETIES. HAVE AN EXPERT SITTII{G HERE,
AI,ID
I HE'S SAYII{G -.
HOW IIY OTHER EXPERT WHO WE HEARD FRO}I
AS
..
10
WELL SAY IdE CAN'T
MAKE SENSE OF THE NUIIBERS. THAT'S

11 ALL WE WANT IS SOIIE SPECIFICTTY, THE
KIND OF INFORI{ATTOfl

12 WE'VE GOTTEII FROI{ I,'.G.A. WORKS JUST F1IIE.

13
COURT: RIGHT.
THE ALL LET sAY, FIRST OF ALL,

14 },8 GOT THREE SEPARATE ',tE
SETTLEI.IENT AGREEI,ENTS. WE HAVE

15 TIIREE SEPAMTE DEALS. ALL,WERE APPROVED, ALL
HAVE ITUANCE
IN
16 DIFFERENCES THEIR REAUIREIIENTS AND WHAT TO
NEEDS BE
17
Dot{E.

18 I{OW, IIR. IT
SCHECTER, SEEI,I$ TO IIE THAT YOU

19 TIAVE TO BE CAREFUL WHAT You wIsH FoR So ETIEES; IT.s
AIiID A
20
, IF
iIODIRATE YOU KI{OW, SOI,IE LEVEL OF COOPERATIOI{
WERE
21
SHOWN AND SOIIE EXPLA ATION WERE GIVEN, IT IIIGHT BE A
I,IORE
22 PRUDENT AND IIoRE PRACTICAL
APPROASH, THEI{ SAYIIIIG UNLEss

23 CTASS COUNSEL IIAKE A I,IOTION TO
COIIPEL CO}IPLIAI,ICE l.lITH THE

24
AGREEIIEI,JT AND/0R FURTHER INFORIATIOr,l SUFFTCIENT
sO THAT
25 THE IF
COURT CAN DETERIIINE THE AGREE}IENT IS BEING
CO}IPLIED
26 wIrH; IF SUFFICIEI{T IS
INFORIIATTON BEtNc PROVTDED TO THE

27 CLASS, TO ALLOW THE CLASS TO ..
UiIDERSTANO WHAT'S GOII{G ON
28
THIS IS
NOT DOI{E IN TIIE BACK ROOIi. IT,S DOIiE tN
OPEN

ptmro?t' pv I 6E F fFJJyNIf "D-^D^4!9FN. -cqR
^,,, ^