11/29/10- 12/29/10 deposition transcripts- steven donziger. days 1-8

Case 1:10-cv-00047-MSK -MEH Document 306-1 of 899

Filed 01/07/11 USDC Colorado Page 1

EXHIBIT A

Case 1:10-cv-00047-MSK -MEH Document 306-1 of 899

Filed 01/07/11 USDC Colorado Page 2

Steven Donziger - Chevron Applications

Donziger, Steven - Day0111/29/2010 9:46 AM

Condensed Transcript Prepared by:

Monday, January 03, 2011

Case 1:10-cv-00047-MSK -MEH Document 306-1 of 899Page 1

Filed 01/07/11 USDC Colorado Page 3Page 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Case No. 10 MC 00002(LAK) -----------------------------------x In re: APPLICATION OF CHEVRON -----------------------------------x November 29, 2010 9:46 a.m.

Videotaped Deposition of STEVEN DONZIGER, pursuant to Subpoena, held at the offices of Covington & Burling LLP, 620 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York, before Todd DeSimone, a Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public of the State of New York.

1 2 A P P E A R A N C E S: (Continued) 3 GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 4 3161 Michelson Drive Irvine, California 92612-4412 5 Attorneys for Chevron Corporation BY: ANDREA E. NEUMAN, ESQ. 6 [email protected] 7 - and 8 GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 9 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 10 BY: RANDY M. MASTRO, ESQ. [email protected] 11 KRISTEN HENDRICKS, ESQ. [email protected] 12 13 14 WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 200 Park Avenue 15 New York, New York 10166-4193 Attorneys for Republic of Ecuador 16 BY: C. MACNEIL MITCHELL, ESQ. [email protected] 17 18 19 FREIDMAN KAPLAN SEILER & ADELMAN LLP 1633 Broadway 20 New York, New York 10019-6708 Attorneys for Steven Donziger 21 BY: BRUCE S. KAPLAN, ESQ. [email protected] 22 TIMOTHY M. HAGGERTY, ESQ. [email protected] 23 24 25

Page 21 2 APPEARANCES: 3 EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF & ABADY LLP 75 Rockefeller Plaza, 20th Floor 4 New York, New York 10019 Attorneys for Ecuadorian Plaintiffs 5 BY: JONATHAN ABADY, ESQ. [email protected] 6 MATTHEW D. BRINCKERHOFF, ESQ. [email protected] 7 8 9 COVINGTON & BURLING LLP 10 620 Eighth Avenue New York, New York 10018-1405 11 Attorneys for Ricardo Reis Veiga BY: ALAN VINEGRAD, ESQ. 12 [email protected] NATALIE MacLEAN LEINO, ESQ. 13 [email protected] 14 15 RIVERO MESTRE & CASTRO 16 2525 Ponce De Leon Blvd. Suite 1000 17 Miami, Florida 33134 Attorneys for Rodrigo Perez 18 Pallares BY: ANDRES RIVERO, ESQ. 19 [email protected] JORGE MESTRE, ESQ. 20 [email protected] ERIMAR VON DER OSTEN, ESQ. 21 [email protected] 22 23 24 25

Page 4 1 2 A P P E A R A N C E S: (Continued) 3 EDUARDO FLECHAS & ASSOCIATES 318 South State Street 4 Jackson, Mississippi 39201 Attorneys for Plaintiffs in Lago 5 Agrio case BY: EDUARDO FLECHAS, ESQ. 6 7 8 9 ALSO PRESENT: MAX GITTER, ESQ., Special Master 10 JUSTIN L. ORMAND, ESQ., Assistant to 11 Special Master 12 RACHEL GELB, Paralegal, Covington & Burling 13 DAVID MOYER, ESQ., Chevron Corporation 14 SARA J. McMILLEN, Chevron Corporation 15 LEE BOWRY, Videographer 16 VINCE MAGGIANO, Videographer 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Donziger, Steven - Day01

Pages 1 - 4



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

THE VIDEOGRAPHER: My name is Lee Bowry of Veritext New York. The date today is November 29, 2010 and the time is approximately 9:46 a.m. This deposition is being held in the office of Covington & Burling LLP, located at 620 Eighth Avenue, New York, New York. The caption of this case is In Re Application of Chevron, in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Case No. 10 MC 00001(LAK). The name of the witness is Steven Donziger. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Let me correct you, it is 00002(LAK). THE VIDEOGRAPHER: I stand corrected. Thank you. At this time I would like all of the attorneys and all others present to identify themselves and the parties they represent, after which our court reporter, Todd DeSimone, of Veritext, will swear in Mr. Donziger and we can proceed. MR. KAPLAN: Bruce Kaplan andPage 6

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, for Chevron. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Max Gitter, The Special Master. Seated next to me is Justin Ormand, my associate. MR. MESTRE: Jorge Mestre of Rivero Mestre on behalf of the applicant Rodrigo Perez Pallares. With me is my colleague, Erimar Von Der Osten, and my partner, Andres Rivero. MR. VINEGRAD: Alan Vinegrad of Covington & Burling on behalf of Mr. Veiga. MS. LEINO: Natalie Leino from Covington & Burling on behalf of Mr. Veiga. MS. GELB: Rachel Gelb from Covington & Burling for Mr. Veiga. * * * S T E V E N D O N Z I G E R, called as a witness, having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: EXAMINATION BY MR. VINEGRAD: Q. Good morning, Mr. Donziger.Page 8

Timothy Haggerty of Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman for Steven R. Donziger. THE WITNESS: Steven Donziger. MR. ABADY: Jonathan Abady, Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady, for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs. MR. BRINCKERHOFF: Matthew Brinckerhoff of Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs. MR. MITCHELL: Neil Mitchell, Winston & Strawn, Republic of Ecuador. MR. FLECHAS: Ed Flechas, Flechas & Associates, on behalf of the Lago Agrio plaintiffs. MS. HENDRICKS: Kristen Hendricks, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, on behalf of Chevron. MS. McMILLEN: Sara McMillen, Chevron. MS. NEUMAN: Andrea Neuman on behalf of Chevron Corporation. MR. MOYER: David Moyer, Chevron. MR. MASTRO: Randy Mastro,

DONZIGER A. Good morning. Q. During the course of the deposition, if I ask you anything you don't understand, you want me to repeat it or rephrase it in any way, please say so and I will endeavor to do that. Do you understand? A. Yes. Q. Is there anything that is interfering with your ability to testify truthfully here today? A. No. Q. How old are you? A. 49. Q. Have you ever testified before? A. No. Q. What did you do to prepare for today's deposition? A. I met with my counsel on a number of occasions. Q. Did you review any documents? A. We did. Q. What documents? MR. KAPLAN: Objection.Pages 5 - 8




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER THE SPECIAL MASTER: Answer the question, please. A. Various exhibits filed by you and I think Chevron with the court. Q. Did you review any videotapes? A. Yes. Q. Were those videotapes, did they include videotapes either from the movie Crude or outtakes of the movie Crude? A. Yes. Q. Which ones? A. There were numerous ones. I think that we reviewed the outtakes filed by I believe you on behalf of your client with Judge Kaplan in this particular case. Q. All right. As well as filed by Chevron? A. I believe so. Q. Did you review any other videotapes other than either portions of Crude or outtakes from Crude? A. No. Q. Did you review any photographs? A. No.Page 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER admitted? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. A. Yes. Q. And in Washington D.C.? A. Yes. Q. Both of those licenses are current and active? A. Yes. Q. Where did you work after law school? A. I worked, my first job was with the District of Columbia Public Defender Service. Q. And what was your title or position? A. I was a staff attorney. Q. How long did you work there? A. Approximately two or three years. Q. And what did you do? A. I represented clients accused of criminal offenses.Page 12

DONZIGER Q. Where did you go to college? A. American University. Q. Did you graduate? A. Yes. Q. Where did you go to law school? A. Harvard. Q. Did you graduate? A. Yes. Q. Do you have any other formal education other than that? A. No. Q. Where are you admitted to practice law? A. In New York and in Washington D.C. Q. And when were you admitted in New York? A. I believe 1997. Q. And when were you admitted in Washington D.C.? A. I believe 1992. Q. And have you maintained your professional continuing legal education requirements in New York since you were

DONZIGER Q. And the clients, were they adults or juveniles, or both? A. Mostly juveniles. Q. And after that, where did you work? A. I worked for an organization called the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives. Q. And where is that located? A. In Alexandria, Virginia. Q. And what does that organization, what did it do? A. It is an organization dedicated to criminal justice work, alternative sentencing, criminal justice issues. Q. And how long did you work there? A. Approximately two or three years. Q. And what was your position or title there? A. I headed up a project to examine issues related to the criminal justice system in the United States.Pages 9 - 12




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. Were you doing any litigation in that job or no? A. No. Q. And from when to when, I know you told me two or three years, but from approximately what date to what date did you work there? A. I would say approximately 1994 to 1996. Q. And where did you work after that? A. I worked at a law firm in New York. Q. Which firm? A. Kostelanetz & Fink. Q. And how long did you work there? A. Approximately two years. Q. So from 1994 to 1996; is that correct? A. No. From about 1996 I believe to 1998. Q. Thank you. And what was your position there?Page 14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. It is somebody else? A. Somebody else. There is another individual whose name I don't remember. Q. Who was a partner? A. Yes, I believe so. Q. And what caused you to leave the organization in Alexandria and work for Kostelanetz & Fink? A. A desire to get back into the law, move to New York. Q. "Get back into the law," meaning litigation work? A. Litigation, or, you know, work for a law firm. Q. And where did you work after that? A. I worked with an individual in New York named Gerald Lefcourt. Q. And from when to when did you work for Mr. Lefcourt? A. Approximately from the time I left Kostelanetz & Fink for maybe three years. That took me into maybe 2000,Page 16

DONZIGER A. I was an attorney. Q. And what kind of work did you do there? A. Worked on cases. The firm specialized in tax fraud defense issues, both civil and criminal. Q. And were you doing litigation work or was it -A. It was litigation. Q. Who supervised your work there, was there one attorney in particular or did you work for several? A. Various attorneys. It was a relatively small firm of maybe 15 lawyers. Q. Of the lawyers there, who would you say you had the most interaction with in terms of, you know, supervision? A. As I sit here today, I don't remember his name, but I had a lot of contact with Bob Fink, who was the main partner. Q. Okay. He is not the person you don't remember his name, right? A. No.

DONZIGER 2001. I don't know exactly. Q. Okay. Approximately '98 to 2001 or so? A. Yes. Q. And what was your position there? A. I was an attorney. Q. And what kind of cases did you work on? A. Generally white collar criminal defense cases. Q. Where did you work after that? Well, withdrawn. What caused you to go from Kostelanetz & Fink to Mr. Lefcourt's firm? A. A desire to work in a more comfortable environment and deal with my main area of interest, which was general criminal defense at the time. Q. What do you mean by "more comfortable environment"? A. Well, I felt -- I knew Gerald from before, Gerald Lefcourt. So I felt comfortable with him and I wanted to goPages 13 - 16




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER work with him. Q. And where did you work after Mr. Lefcourt? A. At that point I was involved in an Internet venture for a short period of time. Q. What was that venture? A. It was a venture dedicated toward dealing with criminal justice issues online. Q. Was there a name associated with it? A. Yeah, Crimedia. Q. It is one word? A. C-r-i-m-e-d-i-a. Q. And how long were you associated with that venture? A. About two years. Q. So that's from approximately 2001 to 2003? A. Approximately. Q. And what was your title or position in that venture? A. I was a principal and aPage 18

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. It was dedicated to taking a lot of the materials that I had pulled together for previous work I had done that resulted in a book on criminal justice issues and trying to bring them online in a way that people could learn more about the criminal justice system. Q. Did you author that book? A. I was the editor. Q. And what's the book? A. The Real War On Crime. Q. And when was it published? A. 1996. Q. Who wrote it? A. A lot of people wrote it. I edited it. Q. And did you make money from the distribution of that book? A. No. MR. KAPLAN: Objection. Q. And did you make money from Crimedia? A. No. Q. What happened with Crimedia?Page 20

DONZIGER founder. I don't know if I had a particular title. Q. Was this a for-profit or a not-for-profit venture? A. It was a for-profit. Q. And did you invest any money in that venture? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. A. I don't remember. Q. Who were the other principals or investors in that venture? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. A. It was a group of individual investors. Q. Who? A. I don't remember their names. Q. Any of them? A. No. Q. And what did that venture actually do?

DONZIGER A. It never got off the ground. Q. And did you do anything else -withdrawn. Did you work in any other capacity during the time that you were involved in Crimedia? A. Yes. Q. What? A. Well, I was involved in a case in Ecuador. Q. Is that the Lago Agrio case? A. Yes. Q. Other than that, did you do any other work during the period of time that you were involved with Crimedia? A. I don't believe so. Q. And after Crimedia ended, this is around 2003 or so? A. Approximately, yes. Q. Where did you work then? A. Then I began practicing law on my own. Q. And has that remained the case from then until now?Pages 17 - 20




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. Yes. Q. And did your practice have a name? A. Law Offices of Steven Donziger. Q. Have you had any attorneys work for you in connection with your own practice? A. Yes. Q. Who were they? A. Andrew Woods and Laura Garr. Q. Those are the only two? A. I believe so, yes. Q. Did you have any interns, law interns or other interns, working for you in your own practice? A. There were law interns working on the Lago Agrio case in Ecuador from time to time. Some of them were working under my supervision or supervision of local counsel, but I don't believe I had anyone working with me directly in my practice. Q. And who were the interns who were working under your supervision on thePage 22

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. Katherine Mikush? A. How do you spell her last name? Q. M-i-k-u-s-h. A. It is possible. There is some individuals who I can visualize, but I don't remember their names. Q. When did Ms. Garr work for you, from when to when? A. She also was an intern on the Lago Agrio case. Q. I see. And then obviously a lawyer. When did she work for you as a lawyer, from when to when? A. She worked for me for approximately one year beginning I believe in 2009. Q. And why did she leave your employ? A. She went to work for a law firm. Q. Which firm? A. White & Case. Q. And Mr. Woods, when did he work for you, from when to when?Page 24

DONZIGER Lago Agrio case? A. There has been about 15 or 20 of them. Q. Is there a list of them somewhere? A. I don't believe so. Q. Can you tell me who they are? A. Well, to the best of my recollection, the names that I remember are Aaron Page, Daria Fisher. Q. Can you spell Daria? A. D-a-r-i-a. Q. Thank you. A. Kush Shukla. Q. Could you spell that? A. K-u-s-h S-h-u-k-l-a. Cortelyou Kenney. Graham Erion. Q. Spell Erion. A. E-r-i-o-n. Sara Colon, C-o-l-o-n. Daniel Firger, F-i-r-g-e-r. There were others. I don't remember their names at the moment. Q. Polly Claire Roth? A. It doesn't ring a bell.

DONZIGER A. He started to work for me in September of I believe 2008. Q. And does he still work for you? A. Yes. Q. And in terms of your, what I will call your solo practice, you know what I'm talking about, right? Do you have clients other than anybody you represent in connection with the Lago Agrio case? A. Not at the moment. Q. Have you, since you started your practice in about 2003, had clients other than clients involved in the Lago Agrio case? A. Yes. Q. About how many would you say, approximately? A. A handful, three or four. Q. And in what types of matters were those, civil, are they criminal, are they something else entirely? MR. KAPLAN: Why is this relevant? Objection, relevance.Pages 21 - 24




1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. A. A combination of civil/criminal. Q. And are these all paying clients? A. Yes. Q. How much have you made in total from the representation of these three or four clients? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Sustained. Q. Mr. Donziger, have you ever been the subject of a disciplinary complaint or proceeding? A. No. Q. Are you familiar with the rules of professional conduct that govern attorneys licensed in the State of New York? A. Yes. Q. Have you read them? A. I have not -- at some point I presume I read them back when I wasPage 26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. Yes. Q. As well as understand people who are speaking Spanish? A. Yes. Q. Are you knowledgeable about Ecuadorian law? A. I am not a member of the Ecuadorian bar and I rely largely on local counsel for knowledge of Ecuadorian law, but I have a general familiarity with some legal issues related specifically to the Lago Agrio case. Q. And have you ever received any formal education in any area of Ecuadorian law? A. No. Q. Do you have any other basis of knowledge of Ecuadorian law other than what you have just described? A. No. (Exhibit 352 marked for identification.) MR. VINEGRAD: Can I have 105A? Q. Mr. Donziger -Page 28

DONZIGER studying for the bar and school. I have not read them recently. Q. And do you speak any language other than English? A. Yes. Q. What? A. Spanish. Q. And where did you learn to speak Spanish, or how did you learn to speak Spanish? A. I studied it in school and I practiced it in my work in Latin America. Q. And "school" meaning what, high school, college, what? A. High school and college. Q. And do you consider yourself fluent in Spanish? A. Proficient, somewhat fluent, with a heavy accent. Q. Do you consider yourself able to read written material in Spanish and understand it? A. Yes. Q. As well as speak the language?

DONZIGER THE SPECIAL MASTER: Excuse me, Counsel, just so I understand, you are using now a different lettering system from the one that was used, or is it the case that when exhibits are marked on behalf of the individuals that the whole numbering system for exhibits is different? MR. VINEGRAD: Same system. THE SPECIAL MASTER: I know that from the filmmakers' depositions that we are up to at least 392 or so. MR. VINEGRAD: I think we are up to 352. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And you are about to mark 105A? MR. VINEGRAD: 105A is an internal reference number. I'm sorry about that, Mr. Gitter. Q. Mr. Donziger, I'm handing you what has been marked as Exhibit 352. Please review that. (Witness perusing document.) Q. 352 is the subpoena that wasPages 25 - 28


Case 1:10-cv-00047-MSK -MEH Document 306-1 Filed 01/07/11 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 899Page 29 Page 31

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER issued to you in connection with this case. Have you seen this document before, Mr. Donziger? A. Yes. Q. Have you read it? A. Yes. Q. Can you tell me everything you did to gather documents called for by the subpoena? A. I requested that my counsel, Mr. Kaplan, come to my office, which is in my home, and take everything I had, or copy everything I had, both in terms of hard documents as well as electronic files and take possession of them. I turned over everything I thought I had. Q. And when you talk about electronic documents, does that include all e-mails you had that were called for by the subpoena? A. Yes. Q. Does it include any other electronic documents you had, like if you had a Word document or an ExcelPage 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER within that time period? A. It was related to the case generally, and at that time the case was in the United States, so it was related to that work. Q. I'm sorry, you can finish. A. It might have included documents related to work in Ecuador at the time. Q. About how many bankers boxes of documents would you say you had that you gave to Mr. Kaplan? A. I don't know exactly. Q. What's your best estimate? A. 10 or 20. Q. Do you maintain a diary? A. No. Q. Do you maintain any kind of calendar or appointment book? A. No. Q. How do you keep track of appointments or meetings or things that you are supposed to be doing? A. My schedule changes rapidly,Page 32

DONZIGER spreadsheet on your computer, did it include that? A. It included literally everything I had on my various computers both that were responsive to the subpoena and that were not responsive. Q. Did it include any videos or photographs that you may have had? A. I believe it did. Q. And in terms of hard copy, can you just give me a more specific sense of what you are talking about? A. Well, I had several bankers boxes of documents that I had kept over the course of the litigation. I have been involved in the litigation since 1993. Most of them related to work that I think had been done in the 1990s. Q. And that work, was that in connection with the Aguinda case in the Southern District of New York? A. Yes. Q. Was there also materials related to other aspects of the case

DONZIGER and I generally keep track of stuff in my head or I rely on my associate, Mr. Woods. Q. Are you saying you have no hard copy or electronic document that functions as either a diary or a calendar or an appointment book; is that your testimony? A. Not at the moment. Q. Have you ever maintained such a document? A. Yes. Q. And when? A. Sporadically. There was a time I used a Google calendar system, about two years ago, for a period of a few months. Q. Was that in connection with this case, among other things? A. Yes. Q. And do you have a copy, electronic or otherwise, of that calendar? A. I believe I do. MR. VINEGRAD: I call for its production. Q. Have you ever maintained -THE SPECIAL MASTER: Stop onePages 29 - 32



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER second, please. Mr. Reporter, make a note of that request. We will deal with it at the break. Go ahead. Q. Have you maintained any other -- in the past, have you maintained any other diary or calendar or appointment book or the like relating to this case? A. Yes. Q. And tell me what else you have. A. Well, sporadically I would maintain appointment books. I don't have a specific recollection. Q. Around what period of time are we talking about? A. 1990s, early 2000s. Q. And where are those appointment books? A. They have been discarded. Q. When? A. I don't know. Just in the normal course of cleaning out materials from my office. Q. When is the last time youPage 34

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER moving on from that subject? MR. VINEGRAD: I'm in the middle of talking about subpoena compliance. THE SPECIAL MASTER: May I ask, Mr. Donziger, have you ever recorded your, quote, billable hours, so to say, your time on behalf of clients? THE WITNESS: I have from time to time, yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And you did that presumably when you were at the law firms you described? THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And you have done it also in connection with the work you have done in connection with the Ecuador litigation? THE WITNESS: I have done it sporadically. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Where are those diaries? THE WITNESS: I can't locate them.Page 36

DONZIGER discarded one of the appointment books you are referring to now? A. I don't have a specific recollection. Q. Well, as your best estimate, are we talking about days, weeks, months, years, the last time? A. Certainly not this calendar year. So it would be 2009 and before. I don't have specific recollection. I do know that since I work out of my home and I have a relatively small apartment, I would get rid of clutter from time to time. Q. And other than those appointment books, have you ever maintained either in hard copy or electronic form any other type of diary, appointment book, or calendar, other than the Google calendar and other than the appointment books that you just described? A. I don't believe so. Q. Now -THE SPECIAL MASTER: Are you

DONZIGER Q. Have you ever prepared an invoice, a bill, a billing statement, or the like, for any work that you have done in connection with the Aguinda or Lago Agrio cases? A. Yes. Q. And describe that for me, what bills, what types of bills, when. Tell me more about that. A. The case had a budget that was financed by a law firm in Philadelphia, Kohn Swift & Graf, and I would submit an invoice on a regular basis for a monthly amount of money that was used to maintain my involvement in the case. Q. And during what period of time were you preparing and submitting those invoices? A. I would estimate from maybe the late 1990s until mid-2009. Q. And why did it stop? A. Well, it stopped because the law firm in Philadelphia was no longer involved in the case.Pages 33 - 36



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. Why were they no longer involved in the case? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. A. They were dismissed by the clients. Q. For what reason? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. A. Based on what the clients told me, it had to do with really a divergence of interests -- well, not a divergence of interests, but really a diversion of vision of strategy of the case. Q. What do you mean by that? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. Attorney-client. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Let me leave that to the break. Mr. Reporter, would you make a note of that, please. We may have some further discussion of that. Q. Just answer that yes or no forPage 38

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And that is to say it was done in writing? THE WITNESS: I believe it was done in writing. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And who sent the writing? THE WITNESS: I believe it was Mr. Luis Yanza. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Do you have a copy of that writing? THE WITNESS: I may. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Did the writing have any substance to it other than you are hereby terminated? THE WITNESS: I believe it did. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Did you see the writing before it was sent? THE WITNESS: I don't know. THE SPECIAL MASTER: As you sit here, do you recall the substance of the writing that was contained on that termination letter or notice? THE WITNESS: Yes.Page 40

DONZIGER now, did you personally speak with Joseph Kohn in connection with his firm's termination from the case? A. No. Q. Did any other member of the plaintiffs' team of lawyers speak to Mr. Kohn about the termination of his firm from the case? A. I don't know. Q. Do you know who communicated to Mr. Kohn that his firm had been terminated from the case? A. I believe that representatives of the clients in Ecuador. Q. Which representatives? A. That would be Mr. Luis Yanza. Q. Anybody else? A. I'm not sure. Q. Do you have currently copies of the invoices that you sent -THE SPECIAL MASTER: Before you go on to the invoices, do you know whether or not the termination of the Kohn firm was done in writing?

DONZIGER THE SPECIAL MASTER: What did it say? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. MR. BRINCKERHOFF: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Is the ground privilege? We will take it up at a break. Mr. Reporter, would you please note this point. MR. VINEGRAD: May I continue, Mr. Gitter? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yes, please. Q. Who drafted the letter? A. I don't know. Q. Do you have copies of the invoices to the Kohn Swift & Graf firm that you described before? A. Yes. MR. VINEGRAD: I call for their production. THE SPECIAL MASTER: I want to go back to the questions I was asking. Mr. Donziger, without goingPages 37 - 40



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER into the substance, since we are going to reserve on that, did the termination -strike that. You are aware that the Kohn firm has sued you and others in Philadelphia for declaratory judgment? THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You have read the complaint? THE WITNESS: I have seen it. I have been -- I have been -- it has been summarized to me by my counsel. I don't know if I have actually read it. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Without going into the substance, would it be fair to say that the substance in the letter that you described from Mr. Yanza to the Kohn firm had something to do with the matters that are set forth in the complaint? And I'm not asking you to identify and to state what those things are yet. MR. ABADY: Objection.Page 42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER would insist on voir dire by counsel right now. MR. VINEGRAD: That's fine. And we will try to make those arrangements promptly. Q. Now, did your gathering up of documents responsive to the subpoena include gathering up any documents of either current or former employees of yours? A. I believe it did. Q. Did you speak with Mr. Woods about this subject of the need to gather documents called for by the subpoena? A. Yes. Q. And did he provide you with any? A. Well, Mr. Woods was in direct contact with Mr. Haggerty of my counsel's firm to discharge those duties. Q. To your knowledge, did he produce all documents in his possession, custody, or control that are called for by the subpoena to your counsel?Page 44

DONZIGER THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. THE WITNESS: I don't know the answer to that question. I haven't reviewed the complaint in detail. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Thank you. MR. VINEGRAD: To be clear, subject to any further ruling, I call for the production of the letter that we have been talking about. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Mr. Reporter, would you please make a note of that as well. Even though the witness is here, this is sufficiently uncontroversial, so I can say it. It appears arrangements were not made as they had been in the filmmaker depositions for immediate printout of the LiveNote -pieces of the LiveNote where objections might occur. So there may be some significant delay in following up even for voir dire purposes on these matters. So we just have to put it off, otherwise I

DONZIGER A. I believe he did. I don't know as I sit here today if that actually happened. I assume it did. Q. How about any former employees? A. Well, I haven't had any other employees who were lawyers. I did employ at one time a receptionist or assistant who was not an attorney, and I don't believe that that person -- and there were a couple of other individuals through the years that helped me now and again -- I don't believe they have been contacted. Q. Do you know whether or not they have any materials that are called for by the subpoena? A. I don't know. Q. And who are these individuals? A. These were people who worked for me on a part-time basis. Q. Who are they? A. I don't remember all their names as I sit here today. One gentleman's name was Jeremy. I don't remember his last name.Pages 41 - 44



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. And what did he do? A. He set up the Google calendar system. Among other things, he would answer the phone, help me with documents, copying. Q. Do you remember the name of any other former employees? A. No. There were two different women. I don't remember their names as I sit here today. Q. And how about the interns, did you have -- as of the date the subpoena was served on you, did you have in your possession, custody, or control any materials of any of the interns who had worked on the Lago Agrio or Aguinda cases? A. I don't believe I did. Q. Do you know if they took those materials with them or what happened to them? A. I don't know. I presume they took them with them. Q. Now, in terms of electronic documents, what computer equipment did youPage 46

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. Ever. A. Ever? Q. Yes. Laptops. A. Three, four, five. I don't know exactly. Q. When is the last time you disposed of one of those laptops? A. I don't have any specific recollection. Q. This calendar year or earlier? A. Excuse me? Q. This calendar year or earlier? A. No, this would be many years ago. Q. Did they contain materials relating to the Lago Agrio or Aguinda cases? A. I presume they did. Q. Was the information on the laptop transferred to the new laptop -did you get one -- or your desktop, or not? A. I don't know. I do remember that on one occasion I transferredPage 48

DONZIGER have that contained the materials called for by the subpoena? A. I had a desktop computer. I had a laptop computer. And I had laptops that I had -- that I was no longer using, but was still in possession of. I had a BlackBerry, I had an old BlackBerry, and I asked Mr. Woods to turn all of those over to Mr. Kaplan's law firm for copying. Q. And to your knowledge, was that done? A. Yes. Q. And how many old laptops did you have that you turned over to Mr. Kaplan or his firm? A. I believe one. It might have been two. I'm not sure. Q. And have you ever -- withdrawn. Have you had any laptops in the past that you disposed of or discarded? A. Yes. Q. And how many? A. I would estimate -- from what period of time?

DONZIGER everything from my old laptop to a new laptop, and I believe that was produced. Q. What e-mail addresses have you used ever? A. My first e-mail address was an AOL address sometime in the late 1990s. Q. When did you stop using that, if ever? A. I no longer use it and I have lost track of it. I only used that for two or three years. Q. That was in the '90s? A. Late '90s. Maybe early 2000s. Q. What was the name of your e-mail address? A. I don't remember. I assume it was [email protected]. That is generally the e-mail address that I used. Q. And did you use that in connection with the Lago Agrio or Aguinda cases? A. To the extent I was working on those cases at that time, I presume I did. Q. What other e-mail addressesPages 45 - 48



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER have you used? A. Well, after that I believe I switched to a Yahoo e-mail address, and I believe it was [email protected]. Q. And from approximately when to when did you use that account? A. Sometime in the early 2000s until approximately 2004-2005. I'm not really sure of the years. Q. Did you use it in connection with the Aguinda or Lago Agrio cases? A. Yes. Q. What other e-mail addresses have you used? A. [email protected]. Q. From when to when? A. From the time I stopped using the Yahoo e-mail address, I started using the Gmail address, and I have used that until the present day. Q. And you use that in connection with the Lago Agrio case? A. Yes. Q. Any others?Page 50

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. We felt like our security had been compromised, so we set up an alternative e-mail address to handle certain documents and communications. Q. Relating to the Lago Agrio case? A. Yes. Q. And who is "we"? A. Well, I did, but my associate, Andrew Woods, set it up under my direction. Q. And what do you mean by you felt your security had been compromised? A. We felt that given Chevron's -some of Chevron's activities in Ecuador, that there was a high degree of probability that our e-mail was being read, and we had experiences where computers had been hacked into, and we felt it was prudent to take steps within our limited means to deal with that. So one of the steps we took was to set up this alternative e-mail address. Q. What evidence do you have thatPage 52

DONZIGER A. There is an e-mail address, [email protected]. Q. From when to when did you use that? A. That was set up about two years ago. Q. And do you still have it? A. Yes. Q. And have you used it in connection with the Lago Agrio case? A. Yes. Q. Any others? A. There is another e-mail address that I remembered recently after my counsel asked if there were any e-mail addresses a few days ago. Q. And which e-mail address is that? A. I believe it is called [email protected]. Q. And when was that set up? A. I believe it was set up early in this calendar year. Q. For what purpose?

DONZIGER your e-mails were being read? A. It was a general suspicion and the fact that computers had been hacked into. Q. And what evidence do you have that computers were hacked into? A. It is what both Andrew Woods and Laura Garr told me about their computers. Q. Did they tell you anything more than that? A. They said they lost a lot of documents and their computers had been gummed up and it required them to take them to a person to fix them, and it caused quite a bit of interference in the work. Q. When was this, approximately? A. It was several months ago. I don't remember exactly. Q. And what evidence do you have, if any, that Chevron was responsible for this computer hacking? A. I don't have any.Pages 49 - 52



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER THE SPECIAL MASTER: Stop, please. Fine. Sorry to interrupt. Go ahead, Mr. Vinegrad. MR. VINEGRAD: Thank you. Q. Where is your law office currently located? A. 245 West 104th Street. Q. And that's in Manhattan? A. Yes. Q. It's in your apartment? A. Yes. Q. How long has it been located there? A. Since the fall of 2006. Q. And where was your office located before that? A. It was in a previous apartment in which I lived. Q. Was that on East 79th Street? A. Yes, it was. Q. It was in some document. And how long was it there? A. Approximately four years. Q. Have you had your law practicePage 54

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. And did you have all those materials shipped to you or did you go down there to look at them? A. I had them shipped. Q. By who? A. By a woman who works in the office. Her name is Erica Torres. Q. Were those materials included within the approximately 10 to 20 bankers boxes that you described earlier? A. No. Q. It was in addition to that? A. Yes. Q. So what was the volume of material that was sent to you from the office in Ecuador? A. It was maybe a few hundred pages of materials. It was de minimus compared to the other production. Q. Were there any other locations from which you gathered materials responsive to the subpoena? A. I believe there are no other locations.Page 56

DONZIGER located at any other place other than those two addresses? A. No. Q. Did you gather any materials responsive to the subpoena from any location other than your current apartment/office? A. Yes. Q. From where? A. The law office in Ecuador, the office that is used by local counsel in the Lago Agrio case. Q. And where is that located? A. It is in Quito at Portete Albascabal. Q. Who is the tenant of that office? A. I believe an entity called Selva Viva. Q. And what materials did you have there that were called for by the subpoena? Was that hard copy, electronic, or both? A. It was hard copy.

DONZIGER Q. To your knowledge, other than items appearing on your privilege log, have you produced all documents in your possession, custody, or control that were called for by the subpoena? A. Yes, with the exception of this e-mail address, the last e-mail address I mentioned that we were trying to get the documents from. Q. Understood. To the extent you come into possession, custody, or control of those materials, I call for their production as well. MR. KAPLAN: Agreed. If they are not privileged, then they are called for. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Court Reporter, note that in the transcript. Q. With respect to materials for which you are claiming a privilege, are all -- to your knowledge -- are all such items contained on the privilege log that has been produced to us by your counsel, to your knowledge?Pages 53 - 56



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. Well, the privilege log was prepared by my counsel, not by myself. I assume they are all there. Q. Do you have any reason to believe that they are not all there? A. No. Q. Are you aware of any materials called for by the subpoena that were destroyed or discarded in any way for any reason since you were served by the subpoena? A. No. Q. I'm sorry, since you were served with the subpoena. A. No. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Are you aware of any such, in the period before the subpoena, when you were under an apprehension that you might be subpoenaed? MR. KAPLAN: I object to the form. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. THE WITNESS: When I becamePage 58

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. Or Selva Viva? A. Well, I want to make sure I understand your question. Do you mean do I have direct access through my network or computers to their documents in their computers? Q. Yes. A. No. Q. What access do you have, just so we are clear? A. Well, I have documents that I have gotten from Stratus as part of our relationship that I have. Q. Do you have access to any Selva Viva servers, hard drives, computer databases and the like? A. No. Q. Amazon Watch, same question. A. No. Q. Does the Frente have its own computer server or hard drive or database or the like? A. I assume it does, but I don't have access to it.Page 60

DONZIGER aware that Chevron had filed the first 1782 action against Stratus Consulting, I asked my associates to preserve all documents, not throw anything out. There have been occasions where paper has been discarded, but they were printouts of electronic files that were produced. Q. And other than that, were any other materials called for by the subpoena discarded since you first became aware of the Stratus Consulting 1782 proceeding filed by Chevron? A. I don't think so. Q. Do you have access to any computers, meaning servers or hard drives or computer databases and the like, of anyone else who is working on the Lago Agrio case? A. No. Q. Do you have or have you ever had access to any servers or hard drives or computer databases maintained by Stratus Consulting? A. No.

Q. A. Frente. Q. And who are they? A. Well, there is a lot of people. But the president of the Frente right now is a man named Ermel Chavez, and there is other officers in the Frente, and then there is a lot of people who work there, but I don't know all of their names or even really any of their names at this point. Q. Do you have access to any of the computer servers, hard drives, databases and the like maintained by any of the other attorneys for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs? A. No. Q. And have you ever? A. No. Q. Now, you have asserted privilege with respect to communications between yourself and Winston & Strawn. Are you aware of that?Pages 57 - 60

DONZIGER And who does? I assume the members of the



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. Yes. Q. And on what basis have you asserted that privilege? A. It is really a community of interest privilege involving the fact that Chevron has tried -- has taken legal and other steps to try to shut down the Lago Agrio trial and extinguish the claims of people I represent. They are doing that in an international arbitration. And we have a common interest in resisting efforts by Chevron to shut down and undermine the Lago Agrio trial. Q. Is that the extent of the community of interest, as you called it? A. It is one aspect of it. But as a general matter, I think it has been a central part of Chevron's strategy to, you know, to sue the Ecuadorian government as a way to put political pressure on the government to shut down the trial. And we obviously want the trial to finish. So that's the community of interest. Q. Are there any other aspects ofPage 62

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. And when was this, approximately? A. I don't know the exact date, but I think it was around 2005 or 2006. Q. And was this in an in-person meeting that this agreement was reached? A. Yes. Q. And who said what to reflect this agreement? A. I don't remember who said what. But we agreed verbally that we would have a community of interest or a joint defense agreement as it related to issues, legal issues, we had in common. Q. Just to be clear, is it your testimony that there was an explicit agreement, oral agreement, reached of this nature at that meeting? A. Yes. Q. Do you have any documents that reflect that such an agreement was reached at that meeting? A. No. Q. Who else was present other thanPage 64

DONZIGER the community of interest? A. There might be, but I can't think of any as I sit here. Q. And is there any written agreement reflecting that community of interest between yourself and Winston & Strawn or the Republic of Ecuador? A. Not that I'm aware of. Q. And was there any oral agreement reached that reflected in substance that information shared between yourself and Winston & Strawn or the Republic of Ecuador would be privileged and confidential? A. Yes. Q. And when was such an agreement reached? A. It was reached in what I believe was an initial meeting that I had with counsel for the Republic of Ecuador. Q. And that's Winston & Strawn? A. Yes. Q. And who specifically? A. Neil Mitchell and Raul Herrera.

DONZIGER Mr. Herrera, Mr. Mitchell and yourself? A. I believe we were the only ones present, but I'm not 100 percent sure. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Are you finished with that subject? MR. VINEGRAD: With that law firm, yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Mr. Donziger, could you tell us exactly what the terms were of that agreement, you say the oral agreement that was reached, all the terms, including, for example, its duration, the terms under which it could be abrogated, and so on. THE WITNESS: Well, it was clearly understood that it would last for as long as we had the interest in common, which we still do, in my opinion. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Were there any terms under which either of you could leave the agreement? THE WITNESS: I don't know if that was explicitly discussed, but implicit in those agreements is a partyPages 61 - 64



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER could leave the agreement if it wanted, I presume, but it has never been -- to my knowledge, there has never been any discussion about either party leaving the agreement. THE SPECIAL MASTER: So there was no determination on that subject in this oral agreement; is that correct? THE WITNESS: On what subject? THE SPECIAL MASTER: The right of any party to leave. THE WITNESS: I don't remember. I mean, at the meeting we entered into an oral agreement -THE SPECIAL MASTER: I understand that. I'm trying to understand what the terms of the oral agreement were. And my question was -THE WITNESS: Well, the purpose of the agreement was to protect all communications. THE SPECIAL MASTER: I understand. THE WITNESS: But we didn'tPage 66

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER litigation? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yes, yes. THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And so it was your understanding that the agreement prevented you from sharing with third parties any strategies that you had conveyed or would convey to the Winston & Strawn folks, correct? THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And did it cover essentially all of the strategy, litigation strategies in the Lago Agrio litigation? THE WITNESS: I believe it did. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Sir, is it not a fact that you conveyed on film to the filmmakers of Crude a great deal of the strategy that you had in the Lago Agrio litigation? Yes or no, please. THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Was that a violation of the community of interest agreement that you say you reached orally?Page 68

DONZIGER discuss specifically an end point, if that's your question. THE SPECIAL MASTER: That was one of my questions. But my next question is, did you discuss how and under what circumstances one party could decide to leave the agreement? For example, that they had to give notice, things of that sort. THE WITNESS: I don't remember. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Did you agree that neither you nor Winston & Strawn could reveal to anybody else materials that you exchanged pursuant to this agreement? THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And among the materials exchanged during this agreement, did those include strategies in the Ecuador litigation? THE WITNESS: Well, when you say "the Ecuador litigation," what do you mean exactly? You mean the Lago Agrio

DONZIGER Yes or no, please. THE WITNESS: I don't believe it was. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And what is the reason that it wasn't? THE WITNESS: As I sit here today, that requires a level of legal analysis that I'm not prepared to share and I need to think about that. But as a general matter, the film was separate from the litigation. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Maybe I wasn't clear. As I understood you, you said you reached an agreement with Mr. Mitchell and his colleague whereby the strategies relating to the litigation that was shared with Mr. Mitchell could not by either of you be disclosed to third parties, correct? THE WITNESS: That's my understanding. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yet -strike the word "yet" -- I saw film, sir,Pages 65 - 68



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER in which you discussed the legal strategies at great length, those same legal strategies with the people who were filming the film Crude, correct? THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: I want to know why you think that sharing that information with the filmmakers of the film Crude did not violate the oral agreement you say you had with Mr. Mitchell and his colleague. THE WITNESS: I don't believe it violated it. I don't believe I had the right to waive at least their rights under the agreement. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Are you saying that the agreement permitted you to share with others, third parties, not part of the litigation team, material that you gave to Mr. Mitchell? That is the nature of the agreement you had? THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: And did you not consider, sir, that when youPage 70

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER e-mail exchanges. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Did you ever create a stamp that said privileged, subject to community of interest, or subject to joint defense privilege? THE WITNESS: No. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Do you know whether or not Mr. Mitchell did? THE WITNESS: I don't know, but I don't remember seeing such a stamp on their documents. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Isn't it a fact that there was never a single communication or cover letter that included a legend to that effect, that is subject to joint defense or community of interest privilege? Yes or no. THE WITNESS: I don't remember. I don't believe there was. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Let's take a break. I would like to reflect on this and some other things. Thank you. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are going off the record. The time is 10:45 a.m.Page 72

DONZIGER shared those strategies with the filmmaker, whether it waived their privilege or not, that it was gone? THE WITNESS: Well, I don't know if my conversations with the filmmaker -- I don't know what specific things I said that you are referring to. So you are talking very generally right now. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yes, I am. THE WITNESS: And I don't believe conversations with the filmmaker waive that privilege as I sit here today. But this is a legal issue and that's my personal opinion. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Okay. Let me ask another question. Did you share materials with Mr. Mitchell and his colleague in writing? THE WITNESS: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Were there cover letters? THE WITNESS: I don't know. Generally a lot of the writings were in

DONZIGER This is the end of disk one. (Recess taken.) THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the record. The time is 11:05 a.m. This is the beginning of disk two. BY MR. VINEGRAD: Q. Mr. Donziger, when did Laura Woods stop working for you? A. Laura Garr? Q. I'm sorry, Laura Garr. Andrew Woods and Laura Garr. A. About a month ago, six weeks ago. Q. And did you gather from her any materials that she had that were called for by the subpoena? A. I asked my counsel to gather all the materials in my possession or the possession of my associates. I don't know -- I don't have personal knowledge as to whether that was done. I believe it was. Q. When you gave that instruction to your counsel, did Ms. Garr still workPages 69 - 72



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER for you? A. Yes. Q. And do you have any reason to know one way or the other whether that was done or not? A. I assume it was, but I don't have any personal knowledge as to whether it was done. Q. Tell me more specifically when she started working for you. I think you said 2009. A. The fall of 2009. Maybe September or October of that year. Q. And when you learned of Chevron's 1782 action against Stratus Consulting, did you instruct Ms. Garr to preserve all of her materials relating to the Lago Agrio case? A. I believe I did. Q. And to your knowledge, did she follow those instructions? A. I believe she did. Q. After you were served with the subpoena -- subpoenas in August of thisPage 74

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER question, please. A. I could ask them for it. Q. Do you believe -- do you believe you have the ability to get from them any materials that they have relating to the Lago Agrio case? A. I certainly have the ability to ask them for it. I don't know if I have the ability to get it from them. Q. After you learned of Chevron's filing against Stratus Consulting, did you request of any of your co-counsel, other lawyers representing the Lago Agrio plaintiffs, to preserve any materials they had relating to the Lago Agrio case? A. When you say "co-counsel," who do you mean exactly? Q. I mean any other lawyer who has or does represent any of the Lago Agrio plaintiffs either in the United States or in Ecuador. A. Well, other than the people working directly for me in the United States, I don't believe I made thatPage 76

DONZIGER year in this proceeding, did you -THE SPECIAL MASTER: Are you referring to Exhibit 352? MR. VINEGRAD: Yeah, I'm referring to 352. THE SPECIAL MASTER: The record ought to be clear. MR. VINEGRAD: Yes. Q. When you were served with Exhibit 352, did you ask any of the other lawyers who were representing the Lago Agrio plaintiffs to gather any materials they had that were called for by the subpoena? A. The answer is no. And I don't believe the subpoena as I read it required me to do that. Q. If you wanted materials that one of your co-counsel had relating to the case, could you ask them for it and get it from them? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. Q. If you wanted to. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Answer the

DONZIGER request to anybody. Q. And why not? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Objection. MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Rephrase, Counsel. It has an assumption built into it. There are different ways to ask that question that are not objectionable. MR. VINEGRAD: Okay. Q. Well, do you have any recollection of making that request to any of the other lawyers for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs? A. No. Q. And is there any reason why you did not make that request to any of the Lago Agrio plaintiffs' lawyers? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Closer this time. You may answer. A. I didn't think it was called for by the subpoena. Q. Are you familiar with a site that is maintained by Stratus Consulting,Pages 73 - 76



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER meaning a web site or other external site that you can log into using a password and the like? A. I believe from time to time Stratus set up such a site to store documents. But as I sit here today, I don't know what the name of the site is or how to access it. Q. Have you ever accessed that site? A. I don't know. Possibly on one or -- I don't know. I don't know. I mean, I have a vague recollection I might have accessed it at one time. But generally my practice was to have other people access, you know, that kind of site and print out documents so I could read hard copies. Q. When you say "other people," who are you referring to? A. People working for me, like the associates. Q. I have additional questions about the meeting that you testified aboutPage 78

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER the case? MR. BRINCKERHOFF: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer. THE WITNESS: I believe that's privileged. I mean, you know, the investments in the case relate directly to litigation strategy, and I don't feel comfortable answering that. MR. KAPLAN: In light of what my client said, I will object to that. THE SPECIAL MASTER: We will defer discussion of it until a break and then we will have some voir dire. Maybe we ought to have some voir dire now. Counsel, I will give you a chance to voir dire. You don't have to answer the question posed at this point. But I will let Counsel conduct whatever voir dire he thinks appropriate to the issue. Q. Is there any agreement -withdrawn. Is there any written agreementPage 80

DONZIGER earlier with Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Herrera. Was Eric Bloom at that meeting or not? A. I don't believe he was. Q. Where was that meeting? A. It was in New York City. Q. At whose office? A. The Winston & Strawn office. Q. At that meeting, was there any discussion of whether or not one party to this community of interest agreement that you have testified about, whether one party could waive any protections of that agreement without the consent of the other party? Was there any discussion of that? A. The meeting took place several years ago. I don't specifically recollect whether or not that was discussed. Q. Who is Russ -- pronounce his last name -- DeLeon? A. Yes. Q. Who is Russ DeLeon? A. He is an investor in the case. Q. And how much has he invested in

DONZIGER relating to Mr. DeLeon's investment in the case? A. Yes. Q. And is that one agreement or more than one agreement? A. More than one. Q. And why is there more than one? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Rephrase, Counsel. Sustained. Rephrase, Counsel, please. Q. How many are there? A. I don't know. Q. When were they entered into? A. At various times. Q. Can you do better than that? A. In recent years. Q. Meaning? A. Within the last five years. Q. And is it during that period of time that Mr. DeLeon has invested in the case, the last five years? A. Yes. Q. Did he make one investment orPages 77 - 80



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER more than one investment? A. More than one. Q. And was there a separate agreement for each investment? A. I believe there was. Q. And who drafted the agreements? A. Lawyers. Q. Someone on his side, someone on your side? A. Yes. Q. Who were the agreements between, what parties? A. There were different parties, depending on the agreement, between Mr. DeLeon and the plaintiffs, and I think another agreement was between Mr. DeLeon and the counsel, U.S. counsel. Q. When you say "the plaintiffs," you mean each of the Lago Agrio plaintiffs? A. Their representatives. Q. Meaning who? A. Mr. Pablo Fajardo and Luis Yanza.Page 82

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER statement? A. Discussions between the parties and their counsel. Q. Which parties? A. Mr. DeLeon and the party that was countersigning. In one case myself and Mr. Kohn. Q. And what was that discussion that you were a party to -MR. KAPLAN: Objection. MR. BRINCKERHOFF: Objection. Q. -- regarding confidentiality? THE SPECIAL MASTER: The limited question on the subject of confidentiality, you may answer that. A. Can you rephrase the question in light of the instruction? Q. The question is, what conversation were you a party to with Mr. DeLeon or any counsel of his -- let me finish the question -- regarding the confidentiality of his investment agreement? A. There were multiplePage 84

DONZIGER Q. And the other agreement that you said was between Mr. DeLeon and U.S. counsel, which U.S. counsel are you talking about? A. Mr. Kohn and myself. Q. And do you have copies of each of those agreements? A. I believe I do. Q. Are you familiar with the -just answer this yes or no -- are you familiar with the terms and the substance of the agreements? A. Generally, yes. Q. Is there any provision in those agreements that states that they are privileged and confidential? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: You may answer that question. A. I don't know. I think so, but I'm not 100 percent sure. It was certainly understood that it would be kept confidential. Q. And what's the basis for that

DONZIGER discussions. I don't have specific recollections of when. And it has always been understood with Mr. DeLeon that these would be kept confidential. Excuse me, not the fact of the investment, but the contents of the agreement. Q. And are you maintaining that the amount of money that he invested in the litigation is privileged and confidential? A. Yes. Q. On what basis? A. On the basis of the fact that it directly relates to litigation strategy and our capabilities as litigants to deal with a major oil company. Q. How does the amount of the investment reveal the strategies that plaintiffs or their counsel were utilizing or were considering utilizing in connection with the case? MR. BRINCKERHOFF: Objection. MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Let mePages 81 - 84



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER hear that question again, please. (The record was read.) THE SPECIAL MASTER: I think you can answer that question without revealing the amounts. MR. BRINCKERHOFF: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: I understand. A. It directly relates to the capabilities of the plaintiffs to litigate. MR. VINEGRAD: I would like to come back to this, if I can. THE SPECIAL MASTER: We will be coming back to it. And both sides are going to be given an opportunity to discuss this issue at the break. MR. VINEGRAD: For the record, I call for the production of all of the investment agreements that Mr. DeLeon is a party to. THE SPECIAL MASTER: I think the first question, the antecedent question is, are these documents on thePage 86

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. We would discuss litigation strategy. Q. With her? A. Yes. Q. And who is "we"? A. Well, I would. Q. And do you have any written agreement with her regarding the confidentiality or lack of confidentiality of any communications with her? A. No. Q. Is there any oral agreement that you reached with her regarding the confidentiality of any communications with her? A. I don't remember. As I sit here today, I don't know. Q. And who or what is Amazon Watch? A. Amazon Watch is a nonprofit organization that advocates on issues relating to the environment in the Amazon basin. Q. And what is the basis for yourPage 88

DONZIGER privilege log that was produced, Mr. Kaplan? MR. KAPLAN: I'm not sure. I'm not sure. And I'm not sure also whether they were called for in the subpoena. MR. VINEGRAD: They are on the log, Mr. Gitter. THE SPECIAL MASTER: They are on the log? MR. VINEGRAD: Yes. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Okay. That answers that question at least. We try to narrow the areas of controversy. Q. Is there any other basis for your assertion of a privilege relating to Mr. DeLeon other than what you have testified about already with regard to the confidentiality of his investment in the litigation? Is there any other basis for the assertion of a privilege by you? A. I don't know. Q. What is the basis for your assertion of a privilege for communications involving Trudie Styler?

DONZIGER assertion of a privilege for communications involving Amazon Watch? A. We, or I, would discuss litigation strategy with members of the organization. Q. And is there any written agreement reflecting confidentiality of any such communications? A. No. Q. Is there any oral agreement that was reached by Amazon Watch and you regarding the confidentiality of any discussions with them? A. I don't have any recollection that that was discussed. Q. Who is Karen Hinton? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Hold on one second. I'm just taking notes. I'm sorry, go ahead. Q. Who is Karen Hinton? A. Karen Hinton is an individual who handles our communications, when I say "our," the communications issues for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs.Pages 85 - 88



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. And when you say "communications issues," is that another way of saying public relations, PR? A. Public relations, communications strategy, and the like. Q. And what's the basis for an assertion of privilege with respect to communications involving Karen Hinton? A. The fact that she is considered part of the litigation team and that litigation strategies were often discussed with her or in her presence, and it was understood and she was told that all communications with her were privileged. Q. Who was she told that by? A. By myself and I believe other lawyers on the team. Q. Which other lawyers? A. Mr. Kohn. Q. Any others? A. I believe others as well, but I don't have any personal knowledge. Q. When did you tell her that? A. I've told her that from thePage 90

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. You stated earlier that you've had this discussion with Ms. Hinton many times about the confidentiality of your discussions with her. Is there some reason why that topic has been the subject of many discussions as opposed to one at the onset of the relationship? A. Well, just out of an abundance of caution to continually remind her that the relationship is privileged. Q. Has something happened that caused you to remind her of that relationship? A. Well, there has been a little bit of litigation in the United States initiated by Chevron, which caused us to have the discussion on multiple occasions. I'm talking about the 1782 actions. Q. And can you be more specific, what exactly was discussed between you and Ms. Hinton as a result of those 1782 actions? MR. KAPLAN: Objection.Page 92

DONZIGER very beginning of our relationship on multiple occasions. You know, many times. Q. When did that relationship start? A. I don't know the exact date, but I believe it was about three years ago. Q. Is there any written agreement reflecting confidentiality of communications between Karen Hinton and any member of the plaintiffs' team? A. I don't know. There might be one. I don't believe I have one. There might be one with other counsel, Mr. Kohn. Q. Have you ever seen that agreement? A. I don't remember. Q. Do you have a copy of that agreement? A. I don't believe I do. Q. Any other written agreements between Ms. Hinton and any member of the plaintiffs' team? A. I don't believe so.

DONZIGER Q. Pertaining to confidentiality. MR. KAPLAN: Pertaining to confidentiality? MR. VINEGRAD: Yes. A. Just that our relationship was confidential and considered privileged, or communications I should say. Q. But tell me the context in which that discussion arose. A. Just general context. It happens on a regular basis. Q. Was there some concern that you had that she would share information that you considered confidential? A. Well, she is not a lawyer, so I wanted to remind her of the agreement we had on a regular basis. Q. And what I'm trying to get at is, was there something specific about the 1782 actions that caused you to have that discussion with her? A. Well, the fact that Chevron clearly had the capacity to initiate a 1782 action against anyone associated withPages 89 - 92



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER the Lago Agrio plaintiffs, including her. So that's what initiated the discussion at that point. Q. So your concern is that she could be the subject of a 1782 action, correct? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. MR. ABADY: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Can I have that once again, please. Q. Were you concerned that Ms. Hinton could be the subject of a 1782 action by Chevron? THE SPECIAL MASTER: That question you can answer. A. I thought she was a potential target, yes. Q. And is that the context in which you told her that you viewed her communications with you to be privileged? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: No, I think that is all right. Just without getting into thePage 94

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. Other than what you have testified about already. A. None that I'm aware. Q. Are there documents that although they are not agreements have content that reflects the existence of a confidentiality agreement with Ms. Hinton? A. There might be. I don't know. There might be e-mails that say privileged. But we certainly didn't feel like it was necessary to put that on every communication. It was understood that it was privileged. Q. Who is Mr. or Ms. Mutti, M-u-t-t-i? A. Joseph Mutti is an individual who worked for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs in Quito for a period of time. Q. And is he a lawyer? A. No. Q. What does he do? A. He did public relations work and communications strategy relating to the litigation.Page 96

DONZIGER substance of conversations you had with her, except on the subject of confidentiality, you may answer. A. That was one of the contexts. Q. And what were the other contexts? A. General relationship with a press person, privileged, working in a litigation. Q. And are there any documents that reflect the confidentiality of Ms. Hinton's communications with the plaintiffs' team? A. I don't know what you mean by that. Q. Well, there is no written agreement reflecting this confidentiality, correct? A. I don't know. There might be -Q. Other than what you testified about already. THE SPECIAL MASTER: I think he answered that.

DONZIGER Q. And when was this? A. I don't know exactly. Maybe 2007-2008. Q. Is he still working for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs' team or not? A. No. He maintains a web site for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs' team. But I believe he does it on a volunteer basis. Q. Meaning sort of web site support services; is that what you mean? A. I think so, yes. Q. And whose web site is it? A. I believe it is a web site for the Amazon Defense Coalition in Quito. Q. Is that the same as the Front, the Amazon Defense Front? A. Yes. Q. Or is that a separate entity? A. It is the same entity. It is called by different names because of translation issues, but it is the same group. Q. If I refer to it as the Front, you will know what I'm talking about?Pages 93 - 96



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER A. Yes. Q. Was there a written agreement with Mr. -- is it Mutti, is that how you pronounce it? A. Yes. Q. Is there a written agreement with Mr. Mutti that reflects that any communications between him and the plaintiffs' team would be confidential? A. I don't know. Q. Is there any oral agreement of that type with Mr. Mutti? A. Yes. Q. And tell me about that oral agreement. A. Well, when he began to work for the Lago Agrio plaintiffs in Quito, there was a discussion about the need to maintain confidentiality. Q. And who was a party to that discussion? A. I believe I was and I believe he was. Q. Just the two of you?Page 98

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER the case on specific projects, and I don't remember if she was one of those people or worked on something specific. Q. Was she retained by anybody in connection with the case? A. I don't know what you mean by "retained." Q. Meaning was there some retainer agreement, either oral or written, that she was going to perform services in exchange for a fee or some other remuneration? A. I don't remember, but as a general matter there would be lawyers and legal interns working on the case who did not expect remuneration. So she was never -- she never expected payment. Q. Do you know a gentleman by the name of Snaider, S-n-a-i-d-e-r? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Excuse me, before we leave that, apart from the issue of remuneration, was there any retainer agreement between Ms. Garriga and the plaintiffs or their representatives?Page 100

DONZIGER A. There might have been other people, other lawyers. Q. Was this in Ecuador? A. Yes. Q. What other lawyers? A. I don't remember specifically, but it would have to be one of the other lawyers on the team. There is only a few people it could have been. It might not have been -- I don't remember if there was other people there or not. Q. Who is Stephanie Garriga, G-a-r-r-i-g-a? A. She is a friend of mine. Q. And does she have any role in connection with the Lago Agrio case? A. She used to live in Quito and she is a lawyer, and we would have -occasionally have discussions about the case. But I don't think she ever did anything formally, although she might have. I don't remember. Often from time to time we would have lawyers who would volunteer on

DONZIGER THE WITNESS: You mean a written agreement? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yes. THE WITNESS: I don't believe there was. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Was there an oral agreement? THE WITNESS: I don't know. I don't remember. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Thank you. MR. VINEGRAD: May I proceed? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Please. I thought I ended by saying thank you. Q. Mr. Snaider, what's his -- who is he? A. He is a friend. Q. What's his first name? A. Andres. Q. Does he have any role or connection to the Lago Agrio case? A. Well, he is also a lawyer but he never, as best as I remember, formally worked on the case. He is also married to Ms. Garriga.Pages 97 - 100



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER Q. Has he had any nonlawyer role or involvement in the case of any kind? A. He is a friend. I believe from time to time we would discuss the case. Q. Was there any written agreement with him regarding the confidentiality of any communications you had with him? A. I don't believe there was. Q. Any oral agreement of that type? A. I don't remember. Q. How about with Ms. Garriga, was there any written agreement of confidentiality regarding communications with her? A. I don't believe there was. Q. Was there any oral agreement? A. I don't remember. Q. Did Mr. Snaider have any role or connection to the movie Crude? A. I don't know what you mean by "role or connection." Q. Did he have anything to do whatsoever with Crude, the making ofPage 102

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER MR. VINEGRAD: I was going to. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Can somebody please tell me whether there are any documents on the privilege log which reflect communications with Ms. Garriga or Mr. Snaider. MR. VINEGRAD: There are. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Thank you. MR. VINEGRAD: Just to be clear, I'm not going to continually call for production of documents that have been called for as privileged. We have done that in court and I'm not going to reiterate that on the record. SPECIAL MASTER: But I may have to make some rulings in the course of this, and I would like to know, for example, if they are on the privilege log and therefore presumptively within the subpoena. MR. VINEGRAD: I call for the production of any communications with Ms. Garriga, involving Mr. Garriga or Mr. Snaider that are on the privilege log.Page 104

DONZIGER Crude, the funding of Crude, anything relating to Crude? A. Not really, other than the fact that he suggested potential funding sources for the movie to me. Q. And who did he suggest to you? A. Mr. DeLeon. Q. And did Mr. DeLeon eventually become a funding source for the movie? A. Yes. Q. The primary funding source? A. I believe he was a major funding source. Q. Was Mr. Snaider compensated for that? A. I don't believe he was. I do not believe he was. Q. Luis Yanza, you mentioned him before, who is he? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Excuse me, can I interrupt just for my edification. I assume you are leaving both Mr. Snaider and Ms. Garriga, yes? You are leaving the subject?

DONZIGER THE SPECIAL MASTER: We heard you, Counsel. MR. VINEGRAD: I thought you said you wanted me to do that. THE SPECIAL MASTER: No, no, you misunderstood. I may have to make some rulings in the course of the depositions about communications with these people depending on what you ask. Therefore, now that we are on the subject of those people, I would like to know what the background is so that I can make some rulings later on. MR. VINEGRAD: Understood. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Got it. Q. Mr. Yanza, how did he get involved in the Lago Agrio case? MR. KAPLAN: I'm sorry, I didn't hear the question. Q. How did he get involved -MR. KAPLAN: Who? MR. VINEGRAD: Mr. Yanza, Luis Yanza. A. I don't know the details. InPages 101 - 104



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER the beginning, back in 1993, he seemed to be the person who was most involved in terms of representing the affected communities. Q. And what is his role in connection with the Lago Agrio case specifically, or roles? A. Today? Q. At any time from 1993 to today. I'm just trying to get a sense of what his role or roles is. A. As a general matter, he has always been a leader of the affected communities, the indigenous and farmer communities in the area where Texaco operated. Q. Do you know how he came to get involved or have that role? A. I think he cared about the impacts of the oil contamination and wanted to try to do something about it. But beyond that, I don't really know the details. Q. Do you know which, if any,Page 106

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER There may have been another attorney who had contact with him before me, I don't know. Q. Is there any written agreement reflecting the confidentiality of any communications between Mr. Yanza and any member of the plaintiffs' legal team? A. I don't know. Q. Is there any oral agreement that was entered into by Mr. Yanza and any member of the plaintiffs' legal team regarding the confidentiality of communications with him? A. I believe there was. Q. What's the basis for that belief? A. Well, Mr. Yanza is a central part of the litigation team, even though he is not a lawyer. He represents the plaintiffs. He is involved in strategy discussions. And throughout the many years of his involvement in the case, he has always played that role. And I believe that there was anPage 108

DONZIGER member of the plaintiffs' legal team was responsible for getting him involved? MR. KAPLAN: Objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Can I have it read back, please. (The record was read.) THE SPECIAL MASTER: Is that a privilege objection, Mr. Kaplan? MR. KAPLAN: You know, hearing it again, I will withdraw the objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: That's what I suspected. Go ahead. A. I don't believe any member of the plaintiffs' legal team was responsible for getting him involved. Q. Do you know which member of the plaintiffs' legal team first had contact with Mr. Yanza in connection with the role that he had that you have described? A. No. Q. It was somebody other than you; is that fair to say? A. I don't know. I started to have contact with him many years ago.

DONZIGER oral agreement expressed many years ago as well as periodically throughout the long history of the litigation where that was reiterated. Q. You say you believed there was an oral agreement expressed many years ago. What do you mean by that? A. Well, it was discussed, as it was as a regular matter of course with people who were not lawyers, but who were part -- considered part of the litigation team that conversations, communications, would be held in confidence. Q. And are you testifying that you were present for such a discussion with Mr. Yanza? A. I don't remember. The basis of my testimony is really what has often been done by lawyers on our team through the years with nonlawyers who were part of the litigation team. Q. I understand. But, again, I'm asking you to sort of refer specifically to Mr. YanzaPages 105 - 108



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

DONZIGER and ask you whether or not -- whether you were present for a discussion with Mr. Yanza the substance of which was that any communications with him and the plaintiffs' legal team were to be treated as privileged and confidential. A. Well, I have personally had many conversations with Mr. Yanza about the need to maintain confidentiality and privileged communications. Q. And are you aware of any documents that would reflect that such discussions actually took place? A. There might be. I don't have any -- I'm not aware of any as I sit here today. Q. Now, you are aware, Mr. Donziger, right, that there are a number of meetings with Mr. Yanza and other members of the plaintiffs' legal team that appear either in Crude or in Crude outtakes; are you aware of that? A. Yes. Q. And those meetings took placePage 110

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

11/29/10- 12/29/10 deposition transcripts- steven donziger. days 1-8

Documents