Lawyer Convicted Alongside Conrad Black
Here is a puzzle, from the WSJ Law Blog,
Two Lawyers Convicted Alongside Conrad Black: "
As you all know by now, Conrad Black was found guilty Friday of stealing money from his former company and of obstruction of justice. (Here’s the WSJ story.) But we thought we’d remind you that of the three other former Hollinger executives also convicted of fraud charges, two of them are lawyers (bios courtesy of the Globe and Mail):
- Peter Atkinson: When Conrad Black began to empire-build in the 1970s, he retained Peter Atkinson, then a litigator at Toronto’s Aird & Berlis. Atkinson became Black’s right-hand man, and in 1996 he left private practice to become GC of Hollinger, later becoming an executive at Hollinger International. Atkinson is represented by Michael Schachter of Willkie Farr.
- Mark Kipnis: A lawyer and CPA, Kipnis previously worked at PriceWaterhouse and the now defunct Chicago law firm of Holleb & Coff. He joined Hollinger in 1998. Of the four defendants, Kipnis was the only one who didn’t receive money from the non-compete payments that were at the core of the criminal convictions. Kipnis is represented by Ronald Safer of Schiff Hardin.
As for Conrad Black, he continues an email correspondence with the Globe and Mail. Over the weekend he wrote: ‘We move on to the next phase in this long war. We got rid of most of [the charges], and expect to get rid of the rest on appeal.’
Also last week, Black continued to criticize the 513-page investigation of Hollinger by a special board committee headed by former SEC commissioner Richard Breeden that accused Black of heading a corporate ‘kleptocracy.’ Black wrote: ‘The Breeden ‘$500-million kleptocracy’ is now down to transactions totalling $2.9-million, which were in fact, approved and disclosed, while Breeden and his allies have milked the old Hollinger International for over $100-million [in legal fees]. The bunk about looting, racketeering, and personal extravagance has gone over the side.’
(Via WSJ.com: Law Blog - WSJ.com.)
Forget Conrad Black's attempt to picture stealing between $2 and $6 million from shareholders as some type of victory. The man is ill and has been for quite some time.
The puzzle for me is how Mark Kipnis, someone who received no monetary gain, got caught up in this net. Now, I don't believe that lawyers are some how by their profession less prone to being bullshitted than the ordinary individual. But these transactions were so offside -Black was a fiduciary who could not have competed against his own company and so could not claim any part of the non compete fees. Black could not have taken the opportunity to compete against the purchasers of his newspapers; as an officer with fiduciary duties, he has to turn down certain business opportunities.
So how did Mark Kipnis, who appears by all accounts to be a stand up guy, get caught up in papering what should be a clear no no? I would love to know and understand his thought process.
