EXHIBIT 18
(pages 1,2,7,85,86,87 & 261 of
Mr. Savino’s cross examination by
Mr. Raymond Fink on 8-29-97 concerning
withholding billing statements and
pages 426, 449, 450, 482 of St. Rita’s
principal Mr. Jayson testimony stating
his inability to get billing statements from
D&M)
EXHIBIT 19
(pages 1 & 4 of Elia’s approved Fourth
Amended Plan of Reorganization
showing D&M’s estimate for their fees
to be $226,000 [retainer plus estimate])
EXHIBIT 20
(D&M 8-6-02 e-mail with Client Ledger
indicating that D&M was owed an
additional $504, 124.74 in fees &
disbursements for the period 8-1-00 to
8-1-02)
EXHIBIT 21
(page 13 of Mr. Gwitt’s 8-6-02 letter
reiterating D&M’s claim for an
additional $504,124.74 in fees &
disbursements for the period 8-1-00
to 8-1-02)
EXHIBIT 22
(pages 1, 3 & 4 of Debtor’s Objections
as to Timeliness show that Mr. Savino
knew that his client (Elia) had relied on
financial representations he had made
when he drafted the Fourth Amended
Plan)
EXHIBIT 23
(Notice of Entry of Order dated 2-11-00
& page 8 of said order wherein Judge
Kaplan acknowledges that Elia had
relied on D&M’s fee estimate in its Plan
of Reorganization)
EXHIBIT 24
(pages 224,225,226 & 233 of
Mr. Savino’s cross examination by
Mr. Fink and pages 699 & 715 of Mr.
Fink’s closing discussing D&M’s
justification for double billing its client)
EXHIBIT 25
(page 1 of Mr. Savino’s Responses
to Elia’s Objection to D&M fees falsely
testifying about Elia’s objections to
claimants and maligning Elia principles)
EXHIBIT 26
(U.S. Trustees Objections to D&M’s
First & Second Fee Applications stating
that they were “duplicative, excessive &
showed a lack of billing judgment”)
EXHIBIT 27
(pages 1 & 39 of March 1, 1999
Bankruptcy Court proceeding & page
7 of Judge Kaplan’s 2-10-00 order
showing that Mr. Savino was aware of
the danger D&M’s conflict-of-interest
posed to the individual Elia family
members)
EXHIBIT 28
(pages 15 & 16 of Mr. Savino’s 8-29-97
examination by Mr. Fink wherein Mr.
Savino admits that D&M client billing
records do not necessarily depict the
amounts lawfully owed and may include
“borderline” charges)
EXHIBIT 29
(page 1 & 5 of D&M letter to the Court
representing Elia’s intent to resume
operations; Elia e-mail date 2-13-00
confirming Elia’s intent to resume
operations; pages 12 & 13 of Mr. Gwitt’s
letter of 8-6-02 stating that Elia never
intended to resume operations)
EXHIBIT 30
(Elia letter dated December 20, 1999
confirming D&M partial disclosure of
its conflict-of-interest for the first time
to its client)
EXHIBIT 31
(page 1,13,16 of Mr. Garvey’s 12-17-99
Affidavit stating that Elia was never
served with CPSI’s Summons and
Complaint because its attorney, D&M,
had prepared it )
EXHIBIT 32
(pages 13 & 14 of Debtor’s Objection
As to Timeliness wherein Mr. Savino
for the first time partially discloses the
conflict-of-interest and, upon
information and belief, misrepresents
the scope & true nature of the conflict)
EXHIBIT 33
(page 1 & 2 of Elia April 17, 2007 letter
to Committee on Professional Standards
citing Harvard Law Review article on
Rule 2014 and page 10 of the Local
Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure govern-
ing attorney withdrawals & NYS
Judiciary Law § 487)
