Breaking and associated brands will be offline for scheduled maintenance Friday Feb. 26 9 PM US EST to Saturday Feb. 27 6 AM EST. We apologize for the inconvenience.


Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
The full text of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld’s response to Enron examiner R. Neal Batson, released to Legal Times last week: On March 5, 2003, the Court-Appointed Examiner in the Enron Corp. bankruptcy proceeding issued its Second Interim Report. In notes to the Report the Examiner refers, among other things, to corporate and tax advice provided by Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP to Enron or Bankers Trust in connection with structured tax transactions in which both firms were parties. Akin Gump was initially engaged to advise Bankers Trust on its proposed structure for these transactions. Thereafter, with informed consent of both Bankers Trust and Enron, we provided both corporate and tax advice to Enron in implementing two of the transactions noted in the Examiner’s Report. When Akin Gump acted on behalf of Enron, our corporate lawyers worked hundreds of hours in creating the corporate entities, and documenting each step required to complete complex deals conceived by our clients and their financial advisers. We did not advise Enron, or any other party, on the financial accounting impact of these transactions, nor how they should be reflected in audited financial statements. Nor did we advise on disclosure of the transactions in SEC filings or otherwise. We were told that other professional firms would consider these matters. The work of our corporate lawyers has not been challenged. Our tax lawyers opined on the federal income tax implications of these transactions. Based on the information available to us at the time, as well as prevailing legal standards, we concluded that we could opine on the transactions. Rest assured that if we felt or believed that these transactions were not of a kind that would permit us to advise within the bounds of appropriate professional judgments, we would not have provided favorable opinions. Nevertheless, we recognize that the world has changed in five years. Accordingly, we are doing what every responsible professional service firm would and should do. We have cooperated and will continue to cooperate with the Enron Examiner. Moreover, we are reviewing our records and files to confirm the appropriateness of our advice when it was given some five years ago, as well as how that advice might be viewed under today’s standards. We take pride in the confidence and trust our clients have placed in us. We will continue to earn that confidence and trust by providing our clients with the outstanding service they expect and deserve.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.