12-12321-mg Doc 191-1 Filed 07/06/12 Entered 07/06/12 15:20:13 Pleading Declaration of Jonathan A.

Mitchell In Support of Omnibus Reply Pg 1 of 4

TOGUT, SEGAL & SEGAL LLP One Penn Plaza Suite 3335 New York, New York 10119 (212) 594-5000 Albert Togut Scott E. Ratner Lara R. Sheikh Proposed Counsel to the Debtor and Debtor in Possession

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------X : In re: : : DEWEY & LEBOEUF LLP, : : Debtor. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------X

Chapter 11 Case No. 12-12321 (MG)

SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF JONATHAN A. MITCHELL IN SUPPORT OF DEBTORS APPLICATION FOR ORDER APPROVING, AND AUTHORIZING IMPLEMENTATION OF PROCEDURES FOR DISPOSITION OF CLIENT FILES I, Jonathan A. Mitchell, make this Declaration under 28 U.S.C. 1746 and state as follows: 1. I am older than 21 years of age and suffer no legal disability. I am

competent to make this Declaration. 2. I am the Chief Restructuring Officer of Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, the

debtor and debtor in possession in the above-captioned case (the Debtor). I submit this declaration based on personal knowledge and my review of the Debtors records in support of the Debtors Omnibus Reply (the Omni Reply) to Objections to the Application for an Order Approving and Authorizing Implementation of Procedures for the Disposition of Client Files (the Application) [Docket No. 121] addressing objections filed by: (1) Lloyds America, Inc. and Corporation of Lloyds (collectively,

12-12321-mg Doc 191-1 Filed 07/06/12 Entered 07/06/12 15:20:13 Pleading Declaration of Jonathan A. Mitchell In Support of Omnibus Reply Pg 2 of 4

Lloyds) [Docket No. 152]; (2) CitiStorage, LLC, (CitiStorage) [Docket No. 161]; (3) Iron Mountain Information Management, Inc. (Iron Mountain) [Docket No. 162]; (4) Steven J. Stanwyck (Mr. Stanwyck) [Docket No. 174]; and (5) Dewey & LeBoeuf [UK] LLP (registered in England and Wales with number OC355432) (in administration) (the UK LLP), acting by its joint administrators Messrs. Mark Shaw and James (usually known as Shay) Bannon of BDO LLP, 55 Baker Street, London W1U 7EU, who act as agents for the UK LLP and without personal liability (together, the Joint Administrators) [Docket No. 175].1 I have reviewed the Omni Reply and facts set forth therein are accurate to the best of my knowledge. 3. In anticipation of DLs wind-down, substantially all of DL's active

client matters were transitioned to other law firms, as the responsible attorneys transferred client files with them to their new firms. 4. DL took substantial steps to facilitate the appropriate transfer of

client files. For example, in March, April and May 2012, DL sent emails to and had numerous discussions with departing DL partners advising them of their responsibilities with respect to client files. To assist in that process, DL provided form documentation for clients to authorize the transfer of their files to other law firms. 5. Since March 2012, DL has received over 850 client file transfer

authorizations and utilized existing personnel to collect and preserve client files located in its various offices. The Debtor is still engaged in this process as it continues to complete responses to requests from clients, and is not asking for an order with respect to these requests.

Capitalized terms used herein, but not otherwise defined, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Application.

12-12321-mg Doc 191-1 Filed 07/06/12 Entered 07/06/12 15:20:13 Pleading Declaration of Jonathan A. Mitchell In Support of Omnibus Reply Pg 3 of 4

6.

Notwithstanding these efforts, the Debtor estimates that over

400,000 boxes of files are presently in storage with third parties. The expense associated with storing these files is approximately $110,000 per month. 7. As expected, following on the transfer of clients, I believe that

many of the Client Files relate to inactive or closed matters. Records from the thirdparty facilities that provide storage for the files indicate that 85% of the boxes of Client Files have not been accessed in the last 2 years. 8. The expense to destroy the files will likely also be substantial,

although it cant be estimated until former clients and partners can be deemed to have abandoned the files after receiving notice and an opportunity to retrieve the files pursuant to the Client File Disposition Procedures. 9. The Debtor has received file destruction estimates ranging from

$5.67 to $7.50 per box from DLs three largest New York storage vendors. 10. As of the date of this Reply, post-petition rent has been paid to the

Storage Providers and all other storage providers that have provided the Debtor with an invoice for their services in accordance. 11. I have reviewed the Client File Disposition Procedures set forth in

the Application and Omni Reply to provide for the disposition of Client Files and believe the Client File Disposition Procedures minimize the burden to the Debtor's estate and, at the same time, addresses potential ethical implications, by providing extensive notice to DLs former partners and clients and an opportunity to retrieve their files. 12. I attest that in my business judgment, most of the Client Files are of

inconsequential value to the estate and continuing to maintain them places a significant burden on the estate. At the same time, I believe it is appropriate, in the interest of
3

12-12321-mg Doc 191-1 Filed 07/06/12 Entered 07/06/12 15:20:13 Pleading Declaration of Jonathan A. Mitchell In Support of Omnibus Reply Pg 4 of 4

potential ethical and professional obligations, to take the steps outlined in the Client File Disposition Procedures to provide notice to former clients of the Debtors authorization to dispose of files in its discretion if a timely Client File Disposition Form is not received and acted upon in accordance with the Client File Disposition Procedures. 13. The Client File Disposition Procedures outlined in the Application

strike the correct balance between my obligations to the estate and the potentially applicable ethical and professional obligations. The Client File Disposition Procedures are, in my business judgment, fair and equitable and in the best interest of the estate, and are appropriate under the circumstances. The Client File Disposition Procedures are fully consistent with similar procedures approved by Bankruptcy Courts in cases involving other law firms. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1746, I declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing statements are true and correct. Dated: July 6, 2012 /s/Jonathan A. Mitchell Jonathan A. Mitchell Chief Restructuring Officer