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

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST STATE OF MISSOURI

LOUIS

PAUL GUZZARDO vs GRAND CENTER INC ET AL

Case No

0922-CC01036

DEPOSITION OF PAUL GUZZARDO

TAKEN ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT JUNE 27 2012

1 2 3 4 5

INDEX INDEX PAGE DEPOSITION INFORMATION APPEARANCE PAGE DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE TAX PAGE PAGE NO 2 3 4 5 238 239

LUBBEN

EXHIBITS 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 G H I J K L M DEFENDANT EXHIBIT NO A B C D E F DESCRIPTION Exclusive Representation Agreement 8/19/2003 Friedman Letter 9/5/03 Guzzardo Letter Option Contract Folder B Graphics Documents Related to Financial Feasibility 3/23/04 Emails & Attached Memo 3/23/04 Memo First Quarterly Report Jake Wagman Article 1/20/05 Friedman Email Series of Emails 1/31/05 Newman Email 113 115 117 155 156 158 168 PAGE NO 58 67 72 77 92 107

21 22 23 24 25

N O P Q R

Projection Project Emails Petition The Light Project Materials Logic Systems Invoice Guzzardo Lectures

178 181 192 200 231

1 2

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST STATE OF MISSOURI PAUL GUZZARDO ) ) Plaintiff ) ) vs ) Case No ) GRAND CENTER AL INC ET ) ) ) Defendants )

LOUIS

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

0922-CC01036

DEPOSITION OF PAUL GUZZARDO and examined on JUNE 27 2012

produced

sworn

between the hours of

9 00 in the forenoon and 4 15 in the afternoon of that day at the offices of CALLIS P C PAPA HALE SZEWCZYK & Granite Walmsley a

DANZINGER City

1326 Niedringhaus Avenue before Susannah L

Illinois 62040

Registered Professional Reporter Reporter

Certified Court

and a Notary Public within and for the State in a certain cause now pending in the Louis State of

of Missouri

Circuit Court of the City of St Missouri CENTER

wherein PAUL GUZZARDO is Plaintiff and GRAND ET AL Are Defendants taken on behalf

INC

of the Defendants

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

A P P E A R A N C E S For the Plaintiff CALLIS PAPA HALE SZEWCZYK & DANZINGER By John T Papa 1326 Niedringhaus Avenue Granite City Illinois 62040 (618) 452-1323 Jtp@callislaw com

For the Defendants STINSON By MORRISON & HECKER Lubben LLP

Cicely I

7700 Forsyth Boulevard

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Court Reporter Susannah L Witness

Suite 1100 St Louis Missouri 63105

(314) 863-0800 Clubben@stinson com

PAUL GUZZARDO

Walmsley

RPR

CCR MO #902

Midwest Litigation Services 711 North Eleventh Street St Louis MO 63101

(314) 644-2191 1-800-280-3376

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 A Q A BY MS

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED

by and

between counsel for the Plaintiff and counsel for the Defendants that this deposition may be taken in shorthand by Susannah L Professional Reporter Walmsley a Registered and

Certified Court Reporter

Notary Public and afterwards transcribed into typewriting and the signature of the witness is

expressly waived * * * * *

PAUL GUZZARDO of lawful age produced sworn and examined on behalf

of the Defendants

deposes and says DIRECT EXAMINATION

LUBBEN Q A Q Good morning Good morning We just met in the hallway As you know Mr Guzzardo

my name is Cicely Lubben and I represent the Grand Center Defendants in the lawsuit that you ve brought against them And today I m here to gather

information from you about your claim Can you please state your full name? I m Paul A Guzzardo

Have you ever been deposed before? Yes

1 2

Q A

How many times? Maybe four or five times I haven t

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

thought about it Q today? A Q Yes And just briefly I need you to let me know If you And you understand that you are under oath

if you don t understand one of my questions

answer a question I will assume that you ve understood it And you need to answer verbally so that the court

reporter can take down accurately your answers A Q Of course If you ve been through a deposition before

you ve probably heard those guidelines before? A Q Sure And also that you let me finish my question

before you respond and I will try to do the same and not interrupt you You mentioned that you ve been deposed four or five times before times Can you tell me about those

what they were in connection with? A The most recent would have been in 2001 I

was involved in litigation regarding a wireless frequency company And that was with Attorney General

Jay Nixon and myself as the director of a board

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 before? so long

Q A

And what is the name of that board? It was Humanities Instructional Television

but it became HITEC as the acronym changed Q A Q A H-I-T? E-C E-C Well okay And what about the other times?

there was a property case back in the I think I was deposed in

nineties of a partnership that I think

It s been so long I don t remember if I think

I was deposed before I gave court testimony I was It was a family partnership

Why do I remember that sometime I was deposed involving Larry Calhoun and our law office That s been years ago Q A Q A What was the name of the law office? Calhoun and Guzzardo Any other depositions? Well I said three four It s just been And those two

those are the only things you know Okay

lateral ones Q

are more precise

Have you ever taken any depositions

A full-time Q

Yes

I have

when I was practicing

And about how many depositions have you

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

taken? A You know I really can t remember I was

practicing full-time in the lawyers practice for 13 years and I would suspect I would have taken at least a deposition a month maybe Q A Q In that 13-year time period? I would suspect And maybe more frequently when you were

practicing full-time? A Q A work Q physical Okay Is there anything today about your No Okay Yeah that s when I was The 13 years? So there wasn t that much deposition

mental or emotional health that would

interfere with your ability to give accurate and honest testimony today? A Q I hope not Are you on any medications today that would

interfere with your ability to understand my questions? A Q A No No

Did you prepare for today s deposition? Well I did look at some of my yes you know

correspondence and files

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 before? today?

Q

Okay

Did you speak with anyone other than

your attorney in preparation for today s deposition? A Q No And did you bring any documents with you

A Q

No Okay

I don t have anything with me And have you ever testified in court

A Q nineties? A Q

Yes

I have

You mentioned the property case from the

Yes Do you think you testified in court in

connection with that matter? A Q Yes I know I did

What about the HIT?

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q

No

That case did not go to trial

And are there any other instances where you

testified in court? A remember Q A Have you ever been sued before? I would have been countersued in an I m drawing a blank on that I don t

insurance claim involving Travelers Insurance Company and that would have been involving an elevator

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

incident in 1996 Q A Q A No Okay Any other lawsuits against you?

Where I m a Defendant? Right And again I was Plaintiff countersued

I don t think so Q Okay Have you brought any other lawsuits

aside from the current one? A Q A Q A Yes Well I described -would that be one?

The HITEC one

The HITEC lawsuit Okay? I would have brought as a partner a lawsuit

in a property action in the nineties against a fraternal organization Q What is the name of that fraternal

organizations? A Q A Q A company Boyle The Elks Pardon me? The Elks Club Okay I brought a lawsuit against a real estate The principal was a man by the name of Tim I don t remember if he was the named Plaintiff

or some other corporation concerning some property on

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Washington Avenue Q A What was the time period for that lawsuit? Early nineties probably yeah

I did have a lawsuit brought against a doctor who had done a procedure Plaintiff Zagarfracas That was dismissed I was a named That was George but I cannot

I think that s all of them

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

say that with 100 percent accuracy Q lawsuit So the ones you recall are the HITEC the nineties lawsuit against Elks Club the

Tim Boyle real estate matter and then an action against a doctor for a procedure? A Q A Illinois residence Yes Where do you currently reside? I currently have two residences 1703 South Madison Macomb

and then the other

I keep an apartment in La Capital Federal

Buenos Aires Q And for how long have you had these two

dual residences? A The Buenos Aires was purchased and designed

approximately five years ago and the Macomb residence is really a family residence there anymore My mom doesn t live

It was an elderly home that I kind of

flip back and forth

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

Q

So in about 2007 you moved to the Buenos

Aires residence? A Q A Q residence Yes Yes

And before that did you -Go ahead So in 2007 you moved in the Buenos Aires Do you spend a portion of each year in

Buenos Aires and a portion here? A Q It varies but that is correct

Generally speaking do you spend the same

portion of each year in Buenos Aires? A It depends The last year I ve been in the

UK more than Buenos Aires Q Okay What portion of the last fives year as opposed to traveling to

have you been in the U S Buenos Aires? A Q Let s say half

That s not exact

Prior to 2007 before you obtained the

Buenos Aires residence did you reside in the Macomb Illinois residence? A Q A No I was in St Louis Louis? And

And what was your address in St

It was Cromwell which is in Clayton

I m embarrassed

I would say 725 Cromwell but I don t

think that s correct

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 in St see

Q A Q A

No Okay

that s fine

I don t need that

How long did you reside at that residence? A year and a half two years Well let s

Maybe three years Q A Q A Q So maybe 2004 -Yes -- time period to 2007? Yeah And before that did you live somewhere else

Louis? A I would have lived in another apartment

close by Cromwell for about a year and a half Q A Q So maybe 2002 Yeah Okay 2003?

2003 basically How did you decide to purchase a

residence in Buenos Aires and spend part of your time there? A I had been there before I had done work

with Argentine architects and so knew Buenos Aires And there were some opportunities given with the December 2001 currency collapse in Argentina Q collapse You said the December 2001 currency which made it more affordable for you to

move there and/or do your work there?

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

A Q A Q background A

Yes What is your date of birth? 12/22/1949 I just want to go through your educational Where did you go to high school? I went to high school at Western Illinois

University Laboratory School Q A Q A And then where did you go post high school? Western Illinois University What years were you there? Actually the high school is on the campus so you are there from freshman but college would have been

so you are part of it to senior 67 through Q eight years 71

And then did you go to postgraduate and law

school after that? A Q A Q A Yes I did

Did you go directly into law school? Yes I did

Where did you go? St Louis U

22 23 24 25

Q Louis you? A Q

And what year did you graduate from St

1974 And what state bar license have you had?

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

A Q A Q A

Illinois and Missouri And do you still maintain those as active? Yes Well when you say active?

Do you renew those licenses? I renew those but there are multiple

levels of activity on those Q A Q So perhaps you maintain the minimum? Yes Yes

In case you ever want to go back into the

practice of law? A Q law again? A Q A Time will tell Any other education following law school? Not of a formal degree you know Of course yes

Do you have any intention to ever practice

matriculating model Q Okay I want to go through your employment What

following your graduation from SLU Law School was your first employment following graduation? A Q A for Calvo Q What was the name again? A block away What was the name? Calvo

It was at that time the Law Offices

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 there?

A Q A Q A Q A

Horas Calvo And how long were you employed there? Probably a year and a half Were you an attorney there? Yes And what was your next employment? It would have been Calvo and Guzzardo but

it was a different Calvo Q Okay And how many years were you employed

A Q

That would have been 14 years And would that have been up to about 1990?

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q

89 And you were a partner in that Calvo and

Guzzardo Law Firm? A Q Yes Yes

And where was your employment following

Calvo and Guzzardo? A design work Q A I took some time off travel Okay Well For how long did you take time off? the rest of my life as best as I can I decided to do some

I did some legal work for some people in Barcelona so I moved to Barcelona for a while Spanish studied some

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 been

Q Guzzardo A

Let s start in 1989 when you left Calvo and When would be your next formal employment? Well I was working as a lawyer I did

some work for Jesuit Refugee Services in Asia for about three months Q A What year? That would have been in 92 And then

after returning from Asia I would have been working off and on with an attorney by the name of Linda Murphy who was in Clayton Q A 92- 93 Q A Any other formal employment? After Linda I did consulting an agency work on a more casual an What years did you work with Linda Murphy? It would have crossed over It would have

agent I guess you d call it

basis with Imrat Kahn who was at the time kind of an international musician Q A Q A Q A What is the name again? I-M-R-A-T for Imrat Can you spell it?

K-A-H-N

He was an international musician? Yes And did you consulting work? Yes some contracts and work with him

trying to put together a book and some other things

1 2 3 work?

Q

And what years did you do that type of

A

I mean

off and on that would have been --

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

I was developing property at the time have been Q A Q A 94 Okay Maybe it slid into 96 95

That would

but I m not sure

What other formal employment? Well I then began developing the 1521

building which was the old Walkover Shoe Factory on Washington Avenue Q So did you spend then some period of time

developing different properties in the Washington Avenue area downtown? A Q Yes Yes I

And what years were you involved in

guess we ll say real estate development in that area? A Well in terms of buying a project and I think the project was

trying to develop it purchased in while 91

It would have been sat on for a more

And after leaving Linda I began a more

aggressively trying to develop that property Q conclusion? A Well -And did you develop that property to

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 Cabool?

Q A

I m not familiar with that building Yes there were a number of things which There was a loft that I

were done on the property lived in

there was an apartment which was rented

there was a nightclub that was developed and then the property was sold Q A Q Okay When was the property sold?

It would have been sold at the end of 2002 Are there other properties that you

developed in that area? A Q building? A Q Yes Are there any other projects or employment No So your primary project was the 1521

that you worked on since then that we haven t talked about? A Q Since then? Since mid nineties? I think we left off You did

you did the consulting work for the musician the 1521 building A Q Well

what did you work on after that? I created Cabool Nightclub

What years did you create and/or operate

A

Cabool in its earliest stage would have

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

probably opened up in

96 and ran through

98 in

somewhat different manifestations Q A Any other projects? Yeah on Washington Avenue I ran Media Arts

which was a not-for-profit Q A What years did you run Media Arts? Media Arts would have been running from 97 or so I

would have taken over Media Arts probably

and I think the corporation would have been closed in 2006 maybe organization Q Arts? A guess Most of the time I was the president I What was your title or position with Media It was a Non-For-Profit Missouri Arts

I think there was a period of time that I

stepped down maybe for nine months or something Q A Q 2006? A Q A funding Q What kind of positions would the employees Yes Okay Yes Did Media Arts have employees? It depended upon the Did you then return as president? Yes Were you president at the time it closed in

Sometimes it did

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

have when you had them? A They would have been executive directors

who would have been working with me Q Okay Did you receive payment or

compensation in your role as president? A No I didn t No I didn t I would have but no there

been reimbursed obviously for expenses was no salary Q

So if you incurred any expenses or costs on

behalf of Media Arts Media Arts would repay you? A Q A Arts Q And then to the extent Media Arts had Of course Of course

But you didn t receive a salary? No I didn t receive a salary from Media

funding from time to time you had employees and who would have been paid?

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Arts? DJ s

A VJ s Q

Yes

We had executive directors

we had

disk jockeys What was the purpose or mission of Media

A

Well

I used Media Arts as a platform to

develop certain ideas regarding information technology and the public s fear Q What kind of projects or work would Media

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

Arts

did Media Arts do in furtherance of that

purpose? A Well Media Arts did a series of

installations

ran a media lab at the corner of Those are kind of general

Washington and Tucker

It obviously had a list that would be submitted to the funders Commission 2004 The Regional Arts Louis And we

and I think the City of St

through some funds gave money to Media Arts

would just break down on an annual basis the specifics of what was done the audience was who was involved what the nature of That

how wide the audience is

would vary from year to year Q So you mentioned that Media Arts received

funding from the Regional Arts Commission and the City of St Louis A Any other sources? And a group called 2004 And there may

have been -- and there would have been small donations from individuals Q Okay What other employment or significant

projects did you work on that we haven t talked about yet? A Well I also have my projects as a Fellow

at the University of Dundee Q What year was that?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

A

Well

I am currently a Fellow at the That s in the School of the Scotland you know I started minimal

University of Dundee Environment

That s Dundee some

doing some projects

compensation back in 2006 Q Okay Any other employment or projects? I

know you have done a lot of different things so I m just wanting to hit on the significant long-term

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

projects A There would be some projects with some pay but in

for me to come some place and do something terms of carrying a card -Q A I understand You know

I had a Media Arts card

I had a

card with Linda Murphy card

I have a University of Dundee

So that s how I m trying to answer this now Q And that s helpful So are there any other

significant ones? A That I would have a calling card that I The answer to that would probably

would give someone? be no Q Okay

I want to back up just briefly when you practiced as

Your experience as an attorney

an attorney what kind of lawyer were you? A Largely workmen s comp

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

Q

As a lawyer did you ever draft

review or

revise contracts for clients? A Rarely Very rarely No No I did very No I don t

little transaction

not for clients

think I ever did transactional work for clients Q Okay Would you have reviewed any option

contracts for a client ever? A No My partner Larry Calvo handled the

transactional work Q Did you ever sign any contracts on behalf

of Calvo and Guzzardo like in connection with your business as running your law firm? A be specific Q Sure I m sure I did You know I can t

but I m sure I would have had to Did you ever do any condemnation or eminent

domain type work when you were practicing as an attorney? A Q No I didn t

And then in connection with the when you worked with Linda Murphy the Media Arts work review or

non-attorney work

or the consulting work did you

did you have the opportunity to draft

revise contracts in connection with any of that work? A Yes I dealt with subcontracts

involving -- I ll give you the acronym SLDC which I

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

guess is the St Q

Louis Development Corporation

What would be an example of a type of

contract that you did? A Well I was putting together with St Louis

Development Corporation a contract for a media plaza at the corner of Washington and Tucker and I did get involved in that contract options provision Q project? A Media Box been That would have been shortly before the so we re probably talking it could have I would have to look at those And I think that had an

It had multiple layers

And what was the year roughly of that

99 or 2000

documents Q And would that have been work you would

have been doing on behalf of the Media Arts? A Q A Yes Because it s involving -Yes Media Arts There were two It was

Media Arts and another not-for-profit corporation by the name of City something or other Q Okay Do you recall any other instances

where you ve ever been involved with an options contract other than this litigation? A No I don t at this point I do not have a

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

recollection of that Q done for What other type of contract work have you as a consultant or with the Media Arts or

any of the other significant projects or employment we ve talked about? A I think I would have reviewed some you know my work

contracts for Imrat Kahn during with him would do Q Okay

but my input was limited in terms of what he

Would those be contracts like for

him to perform at a venue? A Q A Q Yeah Things like that? Yeah Any other contract work that you recall as

you sit here? A No but inevitably if you are alive today

one confronts contracts in various personal aspects of one s life so of course I deal with some but I was

not a transactional attorney Q Okay You mentioned the Media Arts Have you ever served in any capacity

not-for-profit

23 24 25

with any other not-for-profit entities? A Well yes And the litigation with that

Attorney General Jay Nixon was regarding this matter

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

I was a Director of Humanities Instructional Television Q A And what years did you serve as director? I would have I believe 1999 I would have you know

come on the board and I was director till February of 2005 so Q Okay

so that would have been six years or

When were you involved -- did you

bring a lawsuit in some capacity against HIT? A Yes I did I brought a lawsuit to remove

all of the directors for wrongdoing Q A Q A What year was that lawsuit? I think it was 2000 I think it was 2000

And what was the outcome of that lawsuit? The outcome of the lawsuit was that the The Attorney General joined

directors were removed

me in the litigation and the directors were removed Q whole time? A Q Yes Okay Yes And was some process put in place to And did you remain a director during this

fill the empty spots for the directors that were removed? A Yes There is a procedure under Missouri

law regarding -- there s a complex series of bits that

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

come into play regarding this

And that was done there had to

where the corporation was reconfigured be sort of actions involving the Federal

Communications Corporation because we were holders of a wireless license procedure Q A Q Okay But eventually resolved Are there any other not-for-profit boards officer? And it was a fairly complex

that you served as a director A Crossings Yes

I m embarrassed sometimes

Crossings was a musical organization which

put a series of musical events together and I would

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

have been on that board probably for four or five years Q A years Q A How did your service on that board end? I resigned I didn t have time You know What time period? I d say 99 through maybe 2004 maybe five

I don t -- nothing of any particular memory Q Okay How did your service on the HITEC

board end in February 2005? A Well I was -- in 2005 my term was coming

to an end and I had been asked by the president 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

board

Fred Blake

B-L-A-K-E

who was the president of

math and philanthropy another term

to submit a nomination for

So I submitted my name for another term

and there was an election held and I was not reelected to the board Q A How long were the terms? Well the terms varied because in the

creation of the board the Attorney General felt it was critical to have an inner -- you know structure Q So it wasn t like all of the directors came an overlapping

off at the same time? A No No and because of the history of the So there was a I had

problems and the public face of that

structure put into play that we could agree on

a three-year term so if my term was coming to an end in February I would have had the first three year terms and then I think everybody had three-year terms off that because we would have been overlapping Q was ending? A Q Right And you were looking to be renewed for So in February 2005 your three-year term

another three-year term? A Correct

1 2 3 4

Q

Did anyone from HITEC tell you the reasons

that you were not elected to another term? A Q No there was no communication

And who made the decision -- let s see

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

You said you were asked to submit to another term election was held voting on -A Q you did? A curious Q A time Q A Q A Q So you can vote for yourself? Yes And who else you want? Yes yes yes I m sure Well The board Who were the people who were

the

So the other members of the board excluding

you are saying excluding me and it s

I don t remember that I m just trying to figure out who votes The board We were all voting at that

So in February of 2005 all of the members

of the board are given some kind of ballot? A Q A Q Yes And they vote who is going to get removed? Of course And who is to remain?

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 past Arts

A Q

Right And no one on the board as of February 2005

gave you any reason for why you were not reelected in 2005? A Q Yes Okay that is correct I was not advised

Have you ever served on any other

not-for-profit boards other than HITEC and Crossings? A Q Media Arts of course And Media Arts HITEC? yes yes Yes I m sorry Media

Crossings A Q Oh

I m sorry I m asking you to go through your

A

Yes

yes

of course

I was on the Sheldon I assume it was I was

which is the Sheldon Arts Foundation called that yes

the Sheldon Arts Foundation

on the Sheldon Arts Foundation Q A What years? I would have been on the Sheldon Arts 90

Foundation board from 19 -- it could have been 91 through Q A of the board 93 maybe

And how did your service on that board end? There was a falling out with the president Dr Lee Jardine and he asked me and

another member of the board to step down because of

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

policy disagreements Q step down? A St Louis Q let me know A Q Yes So in 93 94 you had a falling out with He had a copper manufacturing business in Excuse me That s fine Brandon I m sorry Who was the other member that was asked to

If you remember it later just

the president and he asked you to step down and you did? A Q Yes And you mentioned a policy disagreement

Can you just briefly tell me what the disagreement was about if you recall? A now The Sheldon had received a substantial commitment for funding for an expansion from a Mr Fisher who was the eventual funder for the Gateway Not-For-Profit Corporation And I had been I was a member of the board Of course I recall I m writing about it

when that came in and because of my reputation within architectural circles I was asked to organize the selection of the architects and to assist in

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

developing the program for the expansion of the Sheldon Auditorium And that went on That process I

that I oversaw in various capacities would change think I was a chairman of the committee and then a member of the committee and then a sub of the committee as I said to develop a design for it I believe contracts were There was a

And the design

about to be let to build the design large ceremony awarding

celebrating the design

And

things went awry and the design was not used then to complete the project so there was a dispute regarding

the development of the design and the termination of the design Q Fisher? A Q towards Yes Did you leave the project with any ill will between you and Fisher? Okay And you said the funding came from

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q A Q

I never met Mr

Fisher

He just provided the funding? I never met Mr Fisher

And you mentioned that he also provided

funding to Gateway Not-For-Profit Corporation? A No I was just using that as a way to

identify and he had a fondness for Gateway and I

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

forget -COURT REPORTER BY MS LUBBEN Q Okay Was there any relationship between I m sorry?

the Gateway Not-For-Profit Corporation and the Sheldon Arts Foundation? A I cannot answer that question because I and I was not directly involved with

don t remember the funding

whether or not Gateway came into

existence afterwards or whether there was a crossover I just don t know Q A anything Q boards? A Q A No Who is Sung Ho Kim? Sung Ho Kim is with AxiOme That s the Have you ever served on any for-profit Any other not-for-profit boards? No I hopefully haven t forgotten

name of his company instructor Q Sung Ho Kim? A

He is an architect and

Washington University When did you first have any contact with

I would have been introduced

whether it

was April or May

to meet Sung Ho Kim through Angela

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Miller who is a Professor of Art History at Washington University Q What year roughly would that have been

that introduction through Angela Miller to Sung Ho Kim? A Q That would have been at the end of 2002 And what would have been the purpose of the

introduction to Sung Ho Kim? A Well the year before Angela would have

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

arranged for me to meet and spend time with William Mitchell William Mitchell recently deceased was

the Dean of Architecture at MIT and was the author of a series of significant early books on information systems in urban design Somewhat of a great man

And at that meeting with Mitchell and Miller we discussed some of the ideas which were driving my praxis and how MIT was a hot spot for the development and study of these ideas Q Okay Some of the ideas that you discussed

with Mitchell

were some of those ideas ideas that

were ultimately incorporated into your Media Box concept? A Q right? Yes And then Sung Ho Kim he came from MIT

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 him?

A Q

Correct And so is that how you kind of heard about

A

Yeah

At that time though the name Sung Ho would not have been mentioned

Kim was not mentioned Q Okay

So it was maybe natural a year after

you had met Mitchell for Professor Miller to then follow-up with you to meet -A Q A Q Yes -- Sung Ho Kim? Yes When did you first have contact with Sung

Ho Kim in connection with the Media Box? I know you said you think you met him at the end of 2002? A Well when I met him we said let s discuss And for the next few

some collaborative projects

months we would have spent a fair amount of time together works lab Sung Ho would be showing me some of his

He was from the Robotics Department of MIT Again I m unclear on the defined divisions

within that Q A Okay? And I was showing him work which I had done my Media Lab my nightclub and with

with Media Lab

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

MetroLink which I have not mentioned Q A Q A What is it called MetroLink Oh MetroLink okay Metro?

So that would have been an ongoing kind of

discourse for six months of 2002 Q Okay At some -- and if you ever need a

break just let me know A Q Sure I m fine

So for six months you are showing each talking maybe about potential ideas

other your work

or projects going forward? A Q Yes What happened after that six months did

you select some task or project you were going to move forward on? What was the next step in your

relationship with Sung Ho Kim? A There was a great deal of give and take in Sung Ho would talk about projects he

terms of ideas

was trying to put together with other members of the Wash U faculty I introduced him to an architect who I had worked with on the MetroLink project and also had set up on a Columbia church project which I helped put together Fabian Wonch (phonetic)

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

So it was kind of

you know

this rich

intellectual kind of social scene back and forth and whether or not these ideas might find a place in St Louis to develop Friedman Q A When would that have been? Sometime probably in that six months I I then introduced him to Eric

don t -- I can t tell you anything more specific than that Q Okay Did you ever enter into any written

agreements with Sung Ho Kim? A No The only thing at one point Eric had but then

and that would have been sometime

that expired and we did nothing further on it Q A Q And was that like GFK or GKF? Yeah Okay something initials

And do you know if there was ever an

operating agreement or any other written documents -A Q A Q A No -- other than -No no no

-- creating an LLC -It was like that was done and then we would

24 25

do something more if these things develop obviously nothing developed

And

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 know

Q

So other than any documents related to GKF

or GFK you don t have any other written agreements with Sung Ho Kim? A Q No No

What was Sung Ho Kim s role in connection

with the Media Box? A Well I mean the contract details you

A lot of it -Q Let me back up So you mean option

contract? A Q A Q Yeah Yeah Yeah Was Sung Ho was he involved in drafting or Well -yeah we ll get to that

negotiating the Option Contract? A Q No No

Was he involved in any of the condemnation

proceedings that were involved in this lawsuit? A Q No What was Sung Ho Kim s role in connection

with any funding for the Media Box project? A Sung Ho was working and had been working

and had a partner out of Thailand and there was -- in the initial discussions he said I want you to meet my partner possibly he and his family would have some

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

interest in investing in the Media Box was Todd Q A Q

And his name

I think they went to school together Do you recall his last name? No I don t

So Sung Ho Kim said that Todd might have

interest in investing in Media Box? A Q any funds? A Q Todd? A Q No So other than a potential investment from No Was a firm commitment ever received from Yes What about Sung Ho Kim himself did he have

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Todd

Sung Ho Kim didn t have any involvement in

possible investment in the Media Box project? A Q No That s correct okay

So how would you describe Sung Ho Kim s role with Media Box? Is it fair to say that he was

the person who was responsible for designing the architectural design -A Q A You know --- component of the Media Box? Yeah He tried to create some

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

responsibilities

yes

He would have been the person

who would have been designing the structural obviously with my -- in a collaborative fashion had designed a series of projects Q Okay Other than designing the structure I

for the Media Box in collaboration with you what other responsibilities did Sung Ho Kim have in connection with the Media Box project? A Well you know we were trying to -- this

was a consortium with people thinking about ideas and theory and what would be the functioning program okay So

architecture and program are almost impossible

to divide Q Okay So would Sung Ho Kim also provide

input or feedback on the prospective program content -A Q A Yes -- for Media Box as well? I would give him copies of all my papers I would give talks

invite him to talks I would give

at his office to people who were doing drafting and doing work and thinking about it other projects that he had Q When you say copies of all papers are you the Media Box and

referring to like published papers where you would

1 2 3 4 5

write on topics relevant to Media Box -A Media Box COURT REPORTER finishes the question interrupting Please wait until she

I can t hang on when you keep

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

"When you say copies of all papers are you referring to like published papers BY MS LUBBEN Q Where you are describing or discussing "

components of the Media Box? A Q Or pre-Media Box papers also Okay And then you said talks at his

office where they re doing the drafting It s my understanding that Sung Ho Kim had maybe a group of students or architects associated with Wash designs A Q U that would help him work on Media Box

is that -Yes Okay Yes So from time to time you might come

and talk to him or other students at Washington University about Media Box concepts or pre-Media Box concepts? A Q talked about Correct Okay Is there anything that we haven t

any additional responsibility with Sung

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

Ho Kim in connection with the Media Box? A I mean that s difficult to you know

instill years and work of projects with Sung Ho Generally we ve covered the outlines Q So it sounds like it was a collaboration

you did not have any written document that said here is what Sung Ho is going to do specifically? A Q No Okay Did you pay Sung Ho Kim for the

architectural designs that he provided for the Media Box? A Q No I did not

Did you pay him any compensation for his

time in preparing that? A Q No I did not

Did you pay any costs he might have

incurred in connection with preparing the Media Box designs or models? A Q A some money No Okay No I did not When was your -Media Arts paid Sung Ho Kim But Sung Ho Kim did receive

Yeah -- no I did not

money from Media Arts Q A Do you know how much money he received? No I cannot tell you that I mean I don t

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

remember

but there were payments from Media Arts to

Sung Ho Kim Q Were they payments for the actual designs

or for the costs of materials? A corporation I don t know whether or not the you know was that particular in terms of work or expenses I don t think

him itemizing hours so

but I don t remember Q Do you have any idea what the amount was

was it under $1 000 or was it a huge amount? A No it wasn t huge Could it have been

$3 000 one year?

It never would have exceeded that That s

And could it have been over a couple of years? possible Q but I don t --

And we are talking about work Sung Ho Kim right?

did in connection with the Media Box A Q A Q Kim? A Q Yes Not some other project? Right yes

When was your last contact with Sung Ho

It would have been in the summer of 2005 What was the last contact did you have an

email communication with him A I was at a

did you speak with him?

I think I was at a dinner that

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Eric Friedman had scheduled for Jill McGuire and some other people in the arts community Q So from about 2002 to 2005 you had a lot of How come you haven t had

contact with Sung Ho Kim

any contact with him since the summer of 2005? A Well you know certain events which are

the basis of this lawsuit created a bit of a rift Q A U Okay Well What is your rift with Sung Ho Kim? Sung Ho you know came to Washington

as a -- what s the term

Tenure in waiting

there s a term for that Q He s hoping to put in enough time that

he ll get a permanent position there? A Q A Yes You can be hired as a --

Tenure track? Tenure track of course Yes of course

Sung Ho Kim came to Washington University with a tenure track position Subsequent to the Media Box contract or

20 21 22 23 24 25

around the same time Sung Ho Kim got married

And he

married Heather Woffer who also got a position as a tenure track professor at Washington University you know that was obviously that was important to them and you know kind of the defining controlling And

of their time

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

And after the Jim Day

the series of events

that involved Jim Day and the Post Dispatch Wagman article things got a little dicey Q Okay So the Jim Day it s my

understanding that the Post Dispatch published an article about Jim Day and the eminent domain issues in late January or early February 2005? A Q Yeah So after that did Sung Ho Kim say something

to you to the effect that he didn t want to work with you anymore or what do you mean when you say things got dicey after that article with Sung Ho Kim? A Well Sung Ho at the time of the article so I m

was designing -- I forgot my other employments filling in some of the gaps now

Sung Ho Kim was designing the Secret Baker stage sets for St Louis Community College I at that which

time had been hired as Director of Secret Baker was the title of a play as the Stage Designer as the Stage Designer

And Sung Ho was also hired or AxiOme would have been hired So that was going on at the

time of the article and the Post article press and neither Sung Ho nor his wife Heather attended the play Q So is it your contention that Sung Ho and

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

his wife did not attend the play because of whatever information was published in the Post Dispatch article? A Q A Q You know I would read it that way

Did they ever tell you that? No Did they ever tell you why they didn t

attend the play? A Q We didn t -- no Did you ever ask them?

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q

No Following the play did you have any contact

or communications with them from the time of the play to the summer of A Yes 05? I believe there might have been a

meeting or two arranged by Eric Friedman to see if there was the possibility of resurrecting the project in light of this political maelstrom Q remember A Okay So when was the play 05? do you

was it in the spring of No No

The play was in constant in

production from -- production I shouldn t say

preparation from mid January to the end of February and it would have been running for a couple weeks last two weeks probably of January 2005 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

Q

Okay

So the play was in

January/February 2005? A Q A Q Or it was in production In production? Yes So the performance it would have been

presented in late February? A Q Yes Okay two weeks in late February So Sung Ho Kim did not attend the Between late

Secret play that was in late February February and -A Q A

I should add -- let me clarify Sure Sung Ho and a couple of his students came

in for five minutes to take photos during the performance It was slightly disruptive as to the And then he left

actual performance Q

And you think he was going in there so he of the work he had

would have a record of the stage invested? A Q Absolutely Okay yes

So between late February and the 05 there may have been a

dinner party in the summer

few meetings with Eric Friedman? A Yes And was there one was there two

1

yes

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

Q

Okay

And we re going to come back later but let me move on

and talk about those meeting more a little bit

Do you know if Sung Ho Kim continues to work with -- on projects with Grand Center Incorporated or the other Defendants in this lawsuit in any capacity? A From what I can read from the newspapers

Q

So you ve read about him doing different

projects with the Defendants? A Q A Yes What is the Friedman Development Group? It s a real estate development group

commercial generally Q A And who is Eric Friedman? Eric Friedman is the principal of the

Q

I understand you worked with Eric Friedman

and his company in connection with the Media Box project Before Media Box had you worked with Eric on

other projects? A building Eric represented me in the sale of the 1521

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

Q

Okay

Any other projects you worked with

A

We talked about other projects

but in

terms of other projects where things were actually done and contracts were signed two Q When did you first have contact with Eric it would only be those

in connection with the Media Box project? A I called or sent him an email after I

received an email from Vince Schoemehl Q When did you receive your phone call or

email from Vince Schoemehl? A That would have been in July of 2003 but I don t It

could have been the last week in June quite remember now Q Sure

That first contact from Vince what did he communicate to you?

Schoemehl in 2003 A

He said he was aware of my work and he And

thought I would be a good fit for Grand Center

there was a specific piece of property that he wished to discuss with me and he indicated that he would like to set up a meeting with me which would include Emily Pulitzer and at that time the president of the board whose name whose last name began with an N but I had

25

no contact with that man on any occasion

but there

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

was a third name for that meeting Q A Q Okay Fine Do you recall anything else you discussed And what was your response?

in that first communication? A Q A Q No I think that s fair

And so then a meeting was set up? Yes And do you know when the meeting was? I

have some documents we can look at in a little bit A Q A Yes Sometime after July 2003? 2003 It was July or August It may have Within

been later in July

I m not 100 percent sure

a two to three-week period of time the meeting was set up Q A Friedman Q A Okay Who was present at the meeting? myself Eric

It would have been Sung Ho

Vince Schoemehl and Emily Pulitzer And what happened at the meeting? There would have been the casual I reviewed -- because it was Pulitzer

introductions

I reviewed my architectural work and had a series of international magazines which had published my projects

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q Schoemehl? A Gary

I remember pulling out a picture of me and the architect in a Spanish magazine where my

project was next to the Bilbao Museum Q A Okay So that was part of it And then I think I gave a presentation of Media Lab content as a kind of protocol for Grand Center And then the third part would have been Sung Ho gave a tour of his office and showed the various models of the various proposed projects So that one Okay two three

What response did you get from Vince

Everybody was highly enthusiastic

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q A Q

Same for Emily Pulitzer? Yes Let me back up to your first communication

with Vince Schoemehl When he first contacted you he said he was aware of your work for Grand Center thought you would be a good fit And you said he told you that he

had a specific piece of property that he wanted to discuss with you Do you know at that time if there

was a specific piece of property in mind that he

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

communicated to you? A I would backtrack "I want to talk to you Maybe that was the

about some property that we have " line Q A Okay?

And that is probably a fairer description I

of what would have occurred in that phone call

cannot remember whether or not it went down to "I have a specific one" Q A Q Okay I just can t But you don t recall him telling you or

referring to what we now know is the Day property? A Q Eric No I don t think so I don t think so Sung Ho

Now in this meeting with you

Vince and Emily was there any discussion at that

in person meeting about where this potential project would be located? A nine years I very much think so Obviously it s been

but I m sure I left that meeting with a

certain excitement because of that property and its relationship to the Pulitzer and its relationship to the Contemporary time which was under construction at that

offered such a rare extraordinary opportunity as So I m almost I m almost positive that

a platform

1 2 3 4 5 6

we talked about the Day property Q Would Vincent Schoemehl have been the

person to bring up that property or was this a property that Sung Ho Kim had already seen and looked at? A Oh no no no

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q A Q

So who -It would have to be Vincent Schoemehl Okay Do you remember anything specific

that he told you about that particular piece of property that I m going to refer to as the Day property? A afterwards To my memory there were a series of events And I m not able to pinpoint what

happened at that meeting and what might have happened a few days later in a conversation that succeeded those meetings So within a week or so I was aware this was a piece of property there were condemnation issues condemnation was going to be getting -- there were remediation issues Whether or not that was discussed at that meeting or where you know the phone calls between

Eric and myself elaborated and developed that within the next two weeks I just don t remember

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

Q

Okay

Do you remember anything else

specific about your first in-person meeting with Vincent Schoemehl and Emily Pulitzer? A Just that it was extraordinarily congenial

and there seemed to be a great deal of excitement that now with this TIF this is the type of project which would be welcomed and could be done at Grand Center Q When is the next time you had any

communication with Vincent Schoemehl or anyone else associated with Defendants? A Well at that time Eric Friedman was going And we were bringing

to become the point person

material to his office and he was sending material to Grand Center work Q So Eric became the point person This is so that was how the system began to

late summer 2003? A Q Yes The Option Contract was signed in the What contact do you recall having direct contact with Vincent

spring of 2004

with Vincent Schoemehl

Schoemehl between this meeting here and when the Option Contract was signed? A Well there was another meeting at Sung for thinking through these

Ho s office for further

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

issues

And Craig Kaminer was at that meeting

I

don t believe Emily Pulitzer was Vince was

and I m almost sure So that

but I think Craig stayed later

would have been like a second actual physical meeting Materials were moving back and forth put together summaries of work done project was kind of sent to them But then that meeting at Sung Ho Kim s office or so you know the second meeting The MetroLink I

again I m suspecting 30 days

I dropped off things at the office of

Grand Center more in sort of a casual sort of way ten-minute conversation or something like that There was a consultant that came in from Chicago that may have been in December that Grand

Center was bringing in to evaluate the district I had received a call either directly from Vince or Eric that they wanted to meet with me I

remember spending some time at their office discussing Media Box concepts consultants Q Okay Let me back up a minute So you you know St Louis Media Heritage

mentioned this second in-person meeting with Craig Kaminer Sung Ho Kim Vincent Schoemehl and yourself

Do you recall any discussions about the Day property at that meeting?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 with Mr

A

That would not have been the primary And there may well have been

purpose of the meeting

some secondary side remarks regarding condemnation issues Q I don t recall that at that time Okay And then you might have seen Vincent

Schoemehl in passing when you are passing off materials to Grand Center from time to time? A Q Correct Do you recall discussing the Day property Schoemehl during any of those meetings? A If there was a discussion it would have

been a fairly quick hopefully things are moving forward and nothing more than that Q Do you remember any other contact with

Vincent Schoemehl in this summer 2003 to spring 2004 time period when the Option Contract was signed? I m talking about the time period leading up to the signing of the Option Contract recall any other discussions with Mr the Day property? Do you

Schoemehl about

21 22 23 24 25

A Q A Q

About the Day property? Right Face to face? Or an email I mean I have the emails

Let s talk about on the phone or face to face

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 phone

A

No

I don t recall face to face or on the

Q

Okay THE WITNESS I m going to take a break for

just a second MS

okay? LUBBEN Sure

(A short break was then taken) (Defendant Exhibit A Representation Agreement BY MS LUBBEN Q Exhibit A A I m handing you what we ve marked as Can you identify this? That s -- oh yes That s an agreement Exclusive

was then identified )

with Eric that he would be looking for property for me Q Okay So that s your signature on the

first page of the Exhibit A? A Q Yes So this is your Exclusive Representation

Agreement with Eric Friedman s company? A Q A Q A Yes Yeah

And this is dated? 6/13 6/13/03? Yes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Q

Prior to June 13th

2003

what discussions

did you have with Eric Friedman or anyone else in his company about what you were looking for as far as property wise? A Well Eric was my realtor on the sale of

the 1521 building Q A Right? And after the sale I discussed I might like

to use the proceeds for other property and would look for some And it proceeded on a fairly casual basis And at one time he said let s start

I was in and out

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

looking more seriously and here is the agreement and I said fine Q Prior to signing this agreement did you

talk to him about what size of property you were looking for? A of you know It was fairly spongy what s out there you know in terms

what are things You know I was -- it

costing

what do I want to do

was not terribly precise We talked a little bit about someone else involved I mean you know if

Sung Ho and I had some

discussions that possibly we could have something for Media Arts for rent So there were certain sort of

soft parameters which eventually found itself into 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

Media Box Q Before June 13th 2003 what did you tell

Eric about how much you were willing to spend? A I don t think I said anything then At

some point after the Media Box Eric said something of a half a million dollars or that there may be some money involved but I don t remember saying anything I just don t remember you know I

about costs at this time don t think I did Q Section B Square Foot Okay but

it s all very fuzzy

At the top of this agreement

says Approximate Size plus or minus 7500 Is that consistent with what you were

contemplating in June of 2003? A standard Q I m sorry what seems bigger what you were It seems bigger I think this is more

wanting seems a little bit bigger than that? A No it just seems a little bigger but this

may have been the standard agreement that Eric had Q Well setting aside that it was a standard

agreement is 7500 square feet what you were contemplating? A Q Feet? 7500 square feet Section B where do you see that?

Approximate Size 7500 Square

1 2

A

You know

I guess

I just don t have a

specific -- the specifics

If it says that I just

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

don t remember the specifics of our conversations that they had got that detailed at that time Q What I m asking you setting aside whatever

you had talked about in June of 2003 were you interested in trying to find a property or building of an approximate size of 7500 square foot? A the area Q Okay And then on E it says Price Range If that is signed that seems to be within

$100 000 to $200 000? A I assume we had some conversations what s okay put that in

out there and we said Q

So in June of 2003 you would have been

looking for a piece of property that would have cost you approximately $100 000 to $200 000 to purchase? A Q He would have put that in yes

He would have put that in because that s

what you would have been looking for? A discussion for Q And paragraph C Midtown it says General Location Locust area Does that We would have had some sort of loose yeah that that would be what I m looking

prefer Grand Center

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

accurately reflect the area you were interested in in this June 2003? A Q and Midtown A Q Correct What is the difference between Grand Center is it the same thing? I think it s the same thing Okay And then Locust is an area maybe a

little bit east? A I guess I guess At that time those were

just terms that realtors may be using with clients Q Okay But that accurately reflects the

area you were interested in? A Q Yes Okay Yes And then under your signature it

says Paul Guzzardo or any associated companies or individuals Who would you be referring to by

referencing "any associated companies or individuals"? A standard Again this would have been Eric s

At some time there was -- I could have

bought it through a corporation so I assume this becomes a boilerplate for Eric in dealing with people Q Okay So if you had a company then this say he found a property for you and

would apply to

you wanted an entity -A Yeah

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

Q

-- say you had an ownership interest in the not

entity and the entity wanted to buy the property you? A Q at page 2 Yeah Okay those fine transaction aspects Did you have any -- well

sure

let s look It says

Can you tell me what page 2 is? It s not signed

Agreement for Services

First let me ask you

do you know if there

is a signed copy of this somewhere? A There may be I did pay him $85 an hour Eric and I were very

Sometimes it was discounted close you know Q

How is the work that Eric is to do on

page 2 of Exhibit A different from the work he is to do on page 1 of Exhibit A? A As much as I can remember and memory has

faded on this

this -- nothing happened as a result of It was just signed It was

this first agreement

never even referenced again Q A Okay?

Subsequently --

My relationship with Eric was defined by an

hourly relationship and this non-signed document seems reasonably descriptive of that relationship Q Okay So there might be a signed copy but page 2 of but

I don t have it before you right now

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Exhibit A correct? A Q

this is between you and the Friedman Group

Yes And it says Friedman Group is going to

assist you and your associates in the acquisition of land and the development of a property for residences and a "Media Box" as part of a proposal presented to Grand Center" and that s referring to the proposal

that we ve talked about? A Q Yes And it says "or any location directed by August of 2003

Paul Guzzardo "

So at this time

there was a specific location of where the Media Box project would be A Q August Oh correct? Where s August? I m sorry page 2 is not

you know

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

dated

but it looks like Eric s services -- is it

correct that Eric s services were to start in August of 2003? A Q A Q I believe so Okay I believe I produced the bills You did Okay I do have those Thanks page 1 and 2 did you

Other than Exhibit A

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

enter into any other written agreements with Eric Friedman or his company Friedman Group A recall Ltd? And I don t

I think I produced everything There were some discussions of

confidentiality agreements any other agreements Q

but I don t think there s

As you sit here are you aware of any other

agreements similar to these where you both signed your names? A Q No What were Friedman s responsibilities in

connection with the Media Box? A contract believe Q A Q You mean in the Option Contract? In the Option Contract Okay What was Eric Friedman or his Well most of that I d have to look at the I

I think it s listed in the contract

company s involvement in funding the costs associated with the Media Box? A mechanisms Q Were they going to participate themselves His company was going to explore funding

in the funding or were they just going to help you find other funding?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A

Primarily find other funding

but all

options were open as the project would go forward Q Friedman? A It s been a while Eric attended the Okay When was your last contact with Eric

National Literacy Media Convention with me in St Louis in June of 2007 or May It may have been May

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

And then we had a dinner a couple weeks later would have been in June of 2007 Q with him? A Yes

so that

And that s the last time you had contact

I may have had contact with his which I did because certain

office on website issues

domain names of mine were in his office s name and we had to transfer that Q A Q Did that get straightened out? Yes Okay What role if any did the Media

Arts Alliance have in connection with the Media Box? A Well Media Arts Alliance was an existing

not-for-profit and it offered a platform and structure to various parts of the community because it was a long-term not-for-profit Q Did the Media Arts Alliance provide any

services to the Media Box project?

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 Letter

A question

Well

in my response to your other I

the specifics are a little foggy

indicated that they provided some funding to assist Sung Ho Kim and his office in working on the Media Box Q Okay Other than that did Media Arts

Alliance have any connection or do any work for Media Box? A Members of the board would have possibly you know as a vehicle for

discussed the Media Box

critical media theory in St that they would be Media Box Q Okay

Louis and it was hoped

their offices would be in the

Was any firm agreement ever reached

with respect to the Media Arts Alliance having an office in the Media Box? A Q Not at that stage Okay It was just discussion

I just want to back up a little bit

I have two exhibits that I want to talk about that relate to the early meetings we discussed with Mr Schoemehl (Defendant Exhibit B was then identified ) Q Exhibit B I m handing you what we ve marked as This is a letter from Eric Friedman to Ken 8/19/2003 Friedman

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

Christian dated August 19th

2003

Do you recall

receiving a copy of this letter? A Q A Q A Q Yes Around that time? Let me just take a look at it again Sure Yes Okay In the second paragraph in the well he says "Attached is a one Take your time

middle Eric says

page description of the project to share with your real estate committee for their review and approval to proceed This description is the same with some

minor editing

as the one in the three binders we

provided to Vince and the binders provided to Emily Rauh Pulitzer and Paul Ha in our meeting of August 15th with Vince " So August 15th was that the first meeting

that we discussed a while ago? A I forgot Q Okay And the attached is this an Yes obviously Paul Ha was there as well

accurate description of the Media Box project as of August 2003? A They requested an outline of some of the

possible dimensions of it and this is what we did

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

yes Q A Okay Who prepared page 2 of Exhibit B?

I would assume it would have been done in You know Eric and I with Sung Ho s

collaboration input of course Q Okay

Do you recall drafting this or do

you think Eric drafted this? A sharp pen Q memo? A Grand Center requested a short summary to Okay And what was the purpose of this I may have drafted part of it Eric has a

move the project forward Q And this accurately describes the project

as of August of 2003? A outline Q references Okay In the second paragraph it Sung Ho Yeah it describes a kind of first draft

"The principals are Paul Guzzardo

Kim and Beata Grant " the principals?

What does it mean when it says

22 23 24 25

A

I m not sure -- I think the reference there okay?

would be residents Q A Okay

And I think that the term "principals" is

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

probably not well put Q A Okay And who is Beata Grant?

Beata Grant is just a Professor at

Washington University who was interested in the possibility of having a residence in the midtown area Q A Q A Q And this was just a concept at this point? Yes There were no agreements? No Okay In the second paragraph it says the Media Box will

"The design of this building

demonstrate a prototype information age architectural design Multiple projection systems and screens will These

be integrated into the project facade

information surfaces will engage the public with intriguing visual presentations " describes the "light box" Is this the key component of the Media Box the projection of lights on the screen on the building facade? A And this paragraph is descriptive of And then it

material that was in the binders Q Okay So this same description was

provided in the binders -A Or the --

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Q A

-- to the Defendants? -- or the binders would have included

projects and visual and information from projects and designs which then are summarized in this text Q A Okay So there would have been a graphic

representation of this in the binders Q Okay And the projects in the binders

were those projects you had done or others had done or a combination? A Most of the projects that had been done okay yes

would have been my projects

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 studies

Q A

Okay And I don t have those binders And any

responses regarding the direct content within those binders is truly in a fog but those binders should

have been a basic resume of Guzzardo work I assume they included proposed Sung Ho but at that time I would have been the only

one who had built anything so it would have been my built projects Q Okay In the last paragraph it says

"Principal Sung Ho Kim is currently organizing a symposium at Washington University " Do you know if Sung Ho did present any

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

information about the Media Box at that symposium at Washington University? A presentation Q Okay So no information about the Media No no because I attended that

Box was discussed? A No No There would have been casual

discussions that took place with some of the attendees about the goals of these ideas taking root in St Louis of it Q Okay (Defendant Exhibit C Letter was then identified ) Q Okay I m going to hand you what we ll 9/5/03 Guzzardo but that would have been you know the extent

mark as Exhibit C And take your time and review this My

first question is going to be is this an email you sent Rebecca Krewson on September 5th A Q September 5 A The question? Is this your email to Rebecca Krewson on 2003? I mean my name is up here but this is 2003

written by Eric Q Okay So if we look at the top the very

1 2 3

top it says from Paul Guzzardo to Rebecca Krewson Let me back up A Who is Rebecca Krewson?

Rebecca Krewson is Eric Friedman s

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

secretary Q And the subject line says try this Do you

think you were drafting an email?

Do you think you Pulitzer and

drafted a letter for Eric to send to Ms Mr Ha? A No I don t think so

I think this was

drafted by Eric Q Okay So you think the content of this

email was drafted by Eric? A Q Yes Yes

I m just trying to figure out why it s in Do you think

an email from you to Rebecca Krewson

Eric drafted it and sent it to you to review? A Yes That was a common practice in the

Friedman office Q Okay So any information or correspondence

they are going to send out on behalf of your project they are going to run it by you? A Q A Q Yes Correct? Yes Okay So they would have sent you this

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

draft letter? A Q A Q Yes You would have reviewed it Yes And then maybe you are sending it back to correct?

Rebecca Krewson? A Q A Q says Yes Okay Yes In the letter it says the first paragraph Yes I would suspect

"We very much enjoyed meeting with both of you And this is a letter from Eric Ha Is this referring to the

at Sung Ho s studio" to Ms Pulitzer and Mr

first meeting? A Q Yes Okay it would appear Eric writes to the extent the draft it says "Since we

of this email was written by Eric met

one of the partners has committed to $500 000 in Who is the partner he is

equity to the project " referring to there? A Q

He would be referring to me Okay "Subject to a feasibility study"

It says -- the last sentence of the first paragraph says The Media Arts Incorporated 501(c)3 Board of "met and endorsed the

Directors have meet" (sic)

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

project and approved moving forward on the feasibility study " Why was the Media Arts Board of Directors

meeting and discussing this project? A I would assume the nature of this project

and what the contract said was that there needed to be community activities and community involvement for this project to go forward And the Media Arts at

least in my position was the only organization that I had that involved members of the various communities from Webster to St Louis Community College to

Washington University So it was the first stage of getting a broader community input in this is an important civic project that needed to go forward Q Okay It says they endorsed the project

You are not aware of any requirement that they endorse it? A Q Media Box? A It was just to show that there is community No It was just to further the purposes of the

interest and this project should go forward Q Okay What information about the Media Box

was provided to the Board of Directors to allow them to decide whether to endorse the project?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 then Mr first

A

I would suspect it was a summary of the Schoemehl and Ha

meeting involving Pulitzer Q Okay

So we talked about Exhibit B had the Would something similar to

one page project summary this -A Q I -Let me finish

Would something similar to

page 2 of Exhibit B have been provided to the Board of Directors of the Media Arts Alliance? A Q In some fashion I would suspect Okay And just so I understand yes what came

the Media Box concept or the idea that

something would be developed on the Day property? A The Media Box concept I had been working on Louis mayors

for years with a series of St Q

So you had the concept of the Media Box Schoemehl at some point introduced the Day

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

location and then you worked with Sung Ho after that to create architectural designs using your Media Box concept on that Day location? A Q I think that s a fair description Okay Prior to signing the Option Contract

in March 2004 did you have any communications with the Defendants about what you were willing to spend in order to obtain the Day property?

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

A

Well

the contract creates this structure

of condemnation remediation for environmental remediation and administrative costs and I guess the third one would be demolition that cost will be in terms of And it lays out what you know the Option

And I signed the contract that created a structure for an eventual figure Q Prior to signing the contract did you have

discussions with the Defendants about what the total costs could be if there was a limit on the total costs? A Q For? Total costs for what?

The costs to you to exercise your option to

purchase the property under the Option Contract A I don t have any other -- other than this

document and that contract I don t think there would be anything else Q Okay Well we ll look at the contract and

we ll go through it (Defendant Exhibit D then identified ) A Q A This is heavy Can you identify Exhibit D for me? Exhibit D the is Option Contract to Option Contract was

Purchase Real Estate that I signed

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Q

You entered into this contract with

Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment? A Q A Q Correct It lists you as the buyer Yes And Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment correct? correct?

Corporation as the seller A Correct

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q Guzzardo 78307 St

In the first paragraph it says an individual Louis

"Paul Box

whose address is P O

Missouri "

Was that a residence

address for you? A I just I always kept a P O Box as opposed

to getting mail at a residence Q Okay When did you stop having that Box? I might have had

address or P O A

Probably in maybe -- no 2007 2008

it up to 2008 Q signed it? A Q signed it? A Q

Did you read the Option Contract before you

I hope so Did you understand its terms before you

I hope so And did you consult with anyone before you

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

signed it? A Q A Q A Q Yes Who did you consult with? Eric Friedman Okay Anyone else? no

Not this final agreement Okay

Grand Center Incorporated is not a is it?

party to this Option Contract A It s signed

I m just saying it s signed That s what it says

by Vincent Schoemehl Q A Q Seller

So you are looking at page 6 of Exhibit D? Yes And Vince Schoemehl s name is there under

Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corporation? A Q Correct So is it correct that Grand Center

Incorporated is not a party to this Option Contract? A That seems like a legal conclusion I

don t know what the relationship is between Vandeventer and Grand Center Q Is it your understanding that you entered

into this contract with an entity other than or in addition to Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corporation? A It s my understanding that I had to provide

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

records to the Grand Center Board Q Okay

That s all I know is it your

But my question is

understanding that you entered into this agreement with anyone other than Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment Corporation? A All I understood is that I needed to get otherwise the contract would

records to Grand Center not be approved Q

What in your words was the purpose of the

Option Contract? A Obviously this is highly complex but the

purpose of the Option Contract was to allow the process to begin to develop a Media Box in Grand Center and for Grand Center to be able to claim St Louis s heritage as a site for the development of a critical media study Q How much money did you pay Defendants for

this Option Contract? A Contract Q In the second paragraph it says For and in I did not pay money for the Option

consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1 00) and other good and valuable consideration " Do you have

an understanding as to what is meant by "other good and valuable consideration"?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Option Buyer"

A

These are terms that transactional

attorneys are better suited to describe than I am Q Okay It says who is you Under paragraph 1 it says Grant of "The Seller does hereby grant to "or to an entity to be created by

the Buyer " At the time of this contract in March of 2004 were you anticipating creating any particular entity as referenced in paragraph 1? A might be Q A What was the idea at that time? To what extent we could put together an We were exploring yes what that entity

entity of profit or nonprofit that would be able to move the project forward and put together the funding to make this happen Q concrete? A Q Nothing was concrete Okay no Okay But at this time nothing was

Did you ever assign your interest in

this Option Contract to another person or entity? A No I didn t

23 24 25

Q

Okay

The paragraph 1 references an option Is it

to purchase "the following described property"

your understanding that this is referring to what we

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

call the Day property? A Q Yes And how was the Day property selected as

the location? A Grand Center discussed the Day property as

the location in that August meeting Q Do you recall discussions with Grand Center

about any other locations for the Media Box or was the discussion always focused on the Day property? A It was always focused on the Day property

until the events in May of 2005 Q Okay What were you ideally looking for in

the property that would house the Media Box? A St I was looking for a nexus a connection to

Louis University as the site where these ideas was developed

which are fundamental to my praxis That s one

And I was looking to a physical site that would also allow a public visibility and a public presence for the development and furtherance of ideas Q needs? A to St That location because of its relationship And did the Day property fulfill those two

Louis U and also because it became the triad of which I should have mentioned

the museum district

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 know

Q A Q

With the other two museums being? The Pulitzer and the Contemporary Was there anything about the location of

the Day property that you did not like? A Well there were issues of ecological you

remediation from the Brownfield issue Q A Q Anything else? That would be the primary issue Any minor issues about the property that

you did not like? A I would consider the remediation issues the you know

most critical issues Q Okay

And the Option Contract was specific

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

to the Day property A Q Correct

correct?

If Vandeventer Spring Redevelopment

Corporation could not obtain the Day property did the Option Contract require VSRC as I ll refer to them

to obtain an alternate property for you? A lawyer Again not speaking as a transactional

but I don t recall that there was any

provision which required them to do that Q Okay Does the Option Contract say how

VSRC was supposed to obtain the property? A Well the series of stages which 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

contract deals with

yes

I mean

that lists the

provisions of the contract of course Q Okay Let s look at the contract and show

me the provisions that spell out how VSRC was supposed to obtain the property? A The contract and series of correspondence

that accompany the contract refer to the ongoing condemnation procedures Q So can you just point me to where it refers

to VSRC using condemnation? A while Q A Sure Take your time Again I haven t looked at this for a

And my dealings with this contract were

through Eric Friedman and through accompanying letters regarding condemnation from Grand Center Q I mean if you can t answer the question

you can say I can t answer it And the question is where in the Option Contract does it say how VSRC was supposed to try to obtain the Day property? A I don t know that the contract detailed the

eminent domain powers and responsibility of the Defendant in referencing -- regarding this property I just don t know that

1 2 3 4

Q

Okay

Do you know if the Option Contract

says a specific dollar amount of money that VSRC was supposed to spend in order to obtain the property? A I don t think it does no

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

Q

Was it your understanding that the term of

this Option Contract was for one year? A It was one year and then there was an

automatic six-month jump -Q A Q Okay -- some place So is it fair to say that the initial

option period was from March 2004 to March 2005? A Yes but I understood it really was still

more September of 2005 because the six months went into effect immediately Q So you believe there was an initial one

year plus six months? A Q Yes Okay And it s fair to say you did not

exercise the Option within the first one year period correct? A Q That s correct What was the mechanism in the contract for

exercising the Option Contract had you done that? A A series of complex -- I d have to --

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

again

direct me to paragraphs Q And let me refer to -- I m looking at the It says the first full sentence "The

top of page 2

Option shall be exercised by delivery of written notice to Seller stating a closing date and location " Okay So you would have delivered a

written notice to VSRC in the event you had exercised the Option A Q is that correct? Yes And then the next sentence says "Provided

that Buyer is not in default hereunder and has made significant and material progress toward the development of the Subject Property as set forth in Paragraph 3 below Buyer shall have the right to

extend the Option period for one (1) additional year" and it spells out the payment of $10 000 -A Q Correct -- for extending the initial Option period Was that provision ever

an additional year triggered? A Q A Q No

You did not pay $10 000? No And you did not notify them Defendants

that you wanted to extend it for one year?

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

A Q A Q A Q

No Under this provision? No The top paragraph page 2? No Okay Now with respect to the one year

extension which was contingent on payment of $10 000 is it fair to say that had you wanted to exercise that one year extension you could not have been in default under the contract? A I m not really prepared to give a legal

opinion on the fine points of this Option Q on page 2 Okay It says Look at the third line from the top "Provided that Buyer is not in

default hereunder and has made significant and material progress towards the development " saying assuming those conditions then you can exercise -A Q A Q Of course -- the $10 000 one year extension Yes Yes correct? It s

So it would be your understanding that you

would need to have made significant and material progress toward the development in order to get that one year extension correct?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

A Q

Yes Okay I m not trying to be confusing I

know there are a lot of words and it s not as clear as we might like it So you did not notify Defendants that you wanted to extend this Option Contract for this extra one year It s your testimony however that the

Option Contract was extended for six months? A Q of page 2 A It s -And I ll refer you to the second paragraph Is that what you are referring to? It s -- all I can testify is that there was you know weekly discussions between

ongoing almost

Eric Friedman and Grand Center regarding this Option Contract and its continuing viability And those

discussions began in January of 2005 and were constant Q Okay Is it your testimony that the

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

original

the initial Option Contract period was

extended for six months or do you know? A You know I would have -- it s my

understanding that the Option Contract was in force and effect in May of 2005 Q A Did it terminate in May 2005? I was advised in May of 2005 that 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

Defendant was not going to pursue the acquisition of the property Q Okay Did you ever notify Defendants that

you wanted to extend the period of this Option Contract for six months past the original one year time period? A There were constant discussions that we

were going to find a property to relocate Jim Day And that was implicit Q Okay So it s your understanding that past

the original one year term of the contract there were still ongoing discussions about relocating Day? A Q Yes What is supposed to happen under the Option

Contract if VSRC can t get the Day property within the term of the Option Contract? A Q It expires Okay Now your right to exercise your

option to buy the property is contingent on VSRC being able to obtain the property A Q Of course If VSRC can t get the property -- if VSRC correct?

can t get the property then you don t have the option to buy it A correct? Yes

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Q

Just because VSRC is not able to obtain the

Day property doesn t mean that they breached the Option Contract MR does it? PAPA I ll show an objection You are

asking for a legal conclusion and albeit the fact that Paul is an attorney I don t believe he is obligated to give legal opinions or legal conclusions relative to a particular document that he did not draft A So I --

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

BY MS

LUBBEN Q A If you don t know -I have no opinion on the five points of

transactional law Q And at the time you entered into this

contract with VSRC did you understand that there could potentially be a circumstance where VSRC would not be able to obtain the property? A Q Of course And what would be an example of a situation

where they would not be able to obtain the property? A Again I think these are legal issues law delays appeals

legal issues of eminent domain you know Q

And you refer to delays

appeals in the

condemnation process?

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 I can BY MS

A Q

Of course Now then it s also possible had VSRC

obtained the property perhaps they wouldn t have been able to properly remediate it to sell it to you? A Q The contract recognized that Okay Page 2 of Exhibit D in Section 3 it

it s called Development of the Subject Property references three items that buyer which is you

proposed to develop -- I m sorry -- yeah will prepare

that buyer

The first one is "prepare with Sung Ho

Kim architectural concepts with accompanying drawings and models for the Media Box " Okay Just give me a minute here

(Brief discussion held off the record) (A short break was then taken) LUBBEN Q I ll try to keep this as straightforward as

In paragraph 3 it talks about you preparing architectural concepts a financial

three things

feasibility study and a prospective program and content summary So I want to go through each of those things and identify what that is and what you did with it okay? So the first is architectural concepts

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

I m going to represent to you that in response to my request for production number 5 and 6 I asked you

for the architectural concepts referenced in this paragraph 3 And in your response you referred me to

digitized documents are in Production Folder B Graphics A Q I m going to show you what that folder is Sure Okay (Defendant Exhibit E Folder B Graphics

was then marked for identification ) Q Exhibit E I m handing you what s been marked as I m going to represent to you that this is

everything that was in Production Folder B Graphics So if you can look through that and then my question for you will be does this contain the architectural concepts associated with the Media Box project? A else I m finding like one that is something

so I guess let s go through this Q Let s back up Let s look at the first

couple of pages A Yeah it might be easier to just do that

because I see a drawing in here which is from something else Q Okay which I have no idea Let s look at the first four pages

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

They appear to be photographs of a model? A Yes The first four pages were a model

done on Grand Center to create some sort of read and spacial relationship between proposed Media Box and other existing structures in Grand Center Q A Who prepared that? That would have been prepared at Washington

University by Sung Ho in his studio both by students and people working in his studio Q A When was this model prepared? All I can remember is that I tried to

arrange for Vince to see the model in December of 2003 Q A So at least as of December 2003? Yeah Yeah This would have been this

would have been created in the interim period before the signing of the contract or of the Option Contract Q Okay If you look at page 1 is the Media

Box structure depicted on this model? A sure No There are no Media Box structures It s just a site Let s look I m

in the model No Q Okay

There s no Media Box here So we just looked at the first four

24 25

pages which were the models Can you identify the next subset of pages

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

that go together? A Well there are a series of studies which

follow which are just working studies of structures that can have an informational laminate in front of it Q And when you say informational laminate you

mean a structure that you would be able to put a screen on and project light on? A Yes put screens that project light you know the various surfaces can

depending upon change yes Q modes Okay

Let s look at the first page of the It does say What is

You may not be able to see it

Guzzardo B and then I ve numbered it 238 this? A Okay There are four

Maybe we ll go in a

group of four Q A Okay? They have a blue cast on them This was

just a very preliminary study that had been done by Sung Ho regarding Media Box project Q When you say "study" is this a proposed

design of what might actually go on the Day property or is this -- I m just trying to understand this this something that was being considered? Is

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

A

Yes

This was just an initial study which

was being done while all these other site drawings were being gone you know going over and they were

looking at various surfaces that might be appropriate Very preliminary Q A Q A Okay The next one is marked 239? 2 2 3 3 4? okay 4

Is this 1 Yeah Again 1

those four were the earliest of a block form and that sort

quickly dispensed with of surface Q

So Guzzardo B 238 through 241 were the

first design concepts? A Yes

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 In fact

Q A Q his staff? A Q

And they were disregarded at some point? Yes And they were prepared by Sung Ho Kim and

Of course And then we see Guzzardo B 242 Can we group -It says

Preliminary Design Concept A Yes

those two can obviously be grouped

they are the same Q A Yeah Yeah it looks like it Again it s the secondary more

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

developed system of a series of fragmented screens that are open to potential structures inside that can have multiple functions Q A Okay Now I m looking at Guzzardo B 244? yes where

And I m not quite sure

obviously -- that was just a simple study and I really can t comment on that Q Okay Is that something that Sung Ho Kim

would have designed? A Q Yes And then it looks like Guzzardo 245 Is

that something you are going to pull out? A the project Q A And then the next one is Guzzardo B 246? I think these two are section studies of Yes That is something that is not part of

the ones we earlier talked about where you have the structures and you have these independent floating screens in front of the structures connected to those other two Q similar? A It s you know developing of the structure Okay And then Guzzardo 248 and 249 look So they are

and it s introducing the element of content It was felt important that the building

1 2 3 4 5

should and the demonstration of the building to the public at this time should include a content grammar and so these images are included and they are from my production Secret Q When you say Secret the play the content

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

is from the play Secret? A And the multiple installations of Secret

It had various installations Q It s an example of what could be done with

the Media Box structure? A Q off 250 Yes Okay 251 252 The next set the numbers are cut it looks like 253 and 254 They

all look a little bit related? A photos A model is being built here and these are So the earlier

digitizations from that model

ones are just digital designs and digital designs now are generating fragments of the actual model Q the model? A Q Yeah as it s developing yes Okay So 250 to 254 appear to be depicting

As it s developing

What time frame were

250 through 254 created A Um I m sorry

do you recall? this is a little blurred I

know I showed -- I know this was shown in Grand Center

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

meetings in September of 2004 Australia in August

but I showed it in

so I would have had to have had

this material sometime probably in July of 2004 Q And you said you presented in August in

Australia the material in 250 to 254? A Q I know I did yes

And then it looks like 255 to 258 is

another similar set? A Yes And I think these probably were the

digital drawings that were done before the model was built And then the model would have been built in They would have come

furtherance of these drawings before the model Q of 2004? A Q A staff Q So who Probably And then 259? Okay

That s generally the sequence So these would have been before July

This is sort of my drawing with Sung Ho s

both you and Sung Ho Kim worked on

this particular document? A but yes Q Yeah This primarily would be my drawing

he is also All the prior ones we looked at were correct?

prepared by Sung Ho Kim

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

A Q A

This was prepared by Sung Ho Kim also -All right You put input on this one?

-- but this is one where I aggressively

worked with him Q Okay And this looks like it s depicting

the neighborhood where the Media Box -A Q A Yeah Okay the conceptual idea around Media Box And what is 260?

These are a series of what tend to be

fairly standard urbanist studies of sites that organize information about vehicular circulation commercial parking and then allow for the development which is what you see in some of these other drawings Q Okay Can we group -- let s see Do all

of the rest fall within the same type of -- let s go 260 through 266 A Yes Would all of these -yes I think that would be fair They

allow a mapping and a cartographic organization of urban data which might be relevant to the development and design of any specific project circulation cultural issues It s like an index of that information so you have it both in a brief that would be written out like a legal brief or in this case a series of visual documents which would accompany it people

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Q Kim as well? A Q

Okay

And these were prepared by Sung Ho

Yes And then the last I m going to look at 267 and 268?

it s hard to read A

These were -- these demonstrate multiple

configurations of a series of component pieces that would be interior to a potential Media Box which would then be subject to fragments or entire wraparound screens And so each one of these eight on a page

so these 16 squares offer a checklist of these multiple configurations Q A Q A Q A Different ways you can structure -Yes -- the interior spaces of the Media Box? Yes And then the last one is Guzzardo B 269? I think it speaks for itself Again

trying to provide a certain map of the various

20 21 22 23 24 25

functions within Grand Center Q Exhibit E Okay So all of Exhibit D -- I m sorry but what is

we ve taken out Guzzardo B 245

remaining in Exhibit E

does this constitute the

architectural concepts that you prepared with Sung Ho Kim under paragraph 3 of the Option Contract?

1

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

A Q

Yes

reference to that paragraph

Is Exhibit E the architectural concepts?

And I m looking at paragraph 3 in the Option Contract It lists out three things that you are going to do A Q A Fine Sure Concepts with drawings and models Other things would fit I think fine Let me just take another look

that s a fair statement elsewhere Q

Are you aware of anything that is missing

from this Exhibit E as you sit here today? A Yes The actual built model and

photographs of that built model are not here Q somewhere? A don t know Q Okay Who has possession to your knowledge Unfortunately I can t answer that because I Okay Does that built model still exist

of that built model? A Q Sung Ho Kim Anything else that is missing from what

would be considered the architectural concepts? A There are pictures on the AxiOme website They are not called very similar

which are called Media Arcade Media Box

And they appear to be very

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

to the latter Q

some of these latter drawings Do you know if any designs or

Okay

depictions from the Media Arcade were ever provided to Defendants? A Q concepts I don t know if they were Okay So back to the architectural

if we look to the second paragraph under "During the Initial Option Period

section 3 it says

Buyer shall deliver the referenced architectural concepts" --

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q

Where are you? I m sorry Okay right down here you are

So as I understand this

required to deliver the architectural concepts to Seller for review and approval Okay

What part of Exhibit E was ever provided to Defendants and when? So that s my question for you I

We can break this out into sections understand that the pages 1 through 4 Defendants viewed the model A Q through 241 Defendants? A Yes correct?

The next four documents beginning with 238 do you know if these were provided to

There are -- there were a series of emails

1

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

that provided graphics to the Defendants regarding the Media Box The early ones may have been in-house They may have been Sung Ho and other people I

don t -- I can t answer that simply moving between myself

at Washington University as the discussion began Q A Okay These latter ones clearly were And they

were submitted either separate with the -- prior to the contract signing And then there were more that

were submitted in sequence in June when I submitted a quarterly report and then there were more which were submitted in a presentation to Schoemehl Pulitzer and

a whole collection of Grand Center people at the Pulitzer Foundation in late September And I can -- that s the answer Q Okay So some designs may have been early October

emailed to them? A Q Yes So they would have been attached to an

email from either you or Friedman? A Q A Q Friedman To individuals at Grand Center? Yes And then aside from emailing it sounds like

some of these designs would have been presented to

1

1

Defendants at this late September 2004 meeting?

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

A Q I m sorry

Meeting Okay Are there any other times -- well

and then you said your June quarterly

report had designs attached? A Q Yes Are there any other times when you recall

the designs being shared with Defendants? A No It s possible that there s something

but I specifically recall the designs being

prepared and presented immediately prior -- they had to be there with the Option Contract Designs were

submitted either prior or with the quarterly report and then there was a much more detailed presentation at the Pulitzer Q Okay So the last presentation was with Do you

the Pulitzer perhaps in late September 2004

know as you sit here if all of these designs would have been included in that presentation? A Q A The model was present at the Pulitzer Okay Not not not the model which is the first

4 pages of this exhibit

That model was housed in

another location in Grand Center and was at that location for an extended period of time for people to

1

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

look at it and get a sense of the site

And I believe

maybe Grand -- so that model was elsewhere in Grand Center Q You are referring to again the first 4

pages of Exhibit E? A Q A Yeah Okay And then these latter drawings which that model then was at the Pulitzer

generated a model presentation

And certain drawings would have I doubt very

accompanied that in the presentation

much the more esoteric studies would have been used at that time Q concepts Okay Did Defendants approve the design

did Defendants approve the designs that you

provided to them? A Defendants indicated that they were pleased

in the direction this was going Q Okay And that was verbal at the meeting

in September of 2004? A Q At the meetings and in conversations Okay But you don t have anything in

writing like an approval form that says -A No no there wasn t anything that formal

25

Q

Okay

Do you know how much time Sung Ho

1

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

Kim invested in preparing the models and designs that are the subject of Exhibit E? A Q No I do not know if you know

How much time did you invest

in connection with assisting Sung Ho Kim in the models or designs depicted in Exhibit E? A We were in constant communication you know two And I

would be asked to stop by

three times

a week when schedules allowed to look at models and the developed design So this was an ongoing process

It s not a process that was billable as if I was a defense attorney so therefore I did not maintain a

detailed daily log of the times Q Aside from your time did you invest any

costs in the preparation of the design of the model depicted in Exhibit E? A No I don t remember providing computers or

supplementing anything like that Q Contract Okay Back to paragraph 3 of the Option

the second item that it says that you will

prepare is the Friedman -- it says you will "prepare with Friedman Development Group Capital Ltd and Dublin

LLC a financial feasibility study for the

Media Box as a multi use building and adjacent residential development "

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 done

Is it fair to say that financial feasibility study was not prepared? A I believe there are documents which were the studies with contractors

provided and then those

and cost factors were in the process of being worked on And there were some preliminary studies Arrangements were being made with further

contractors because I think there was some discussion of contractors a list of contractors involved and we

had a series of meetings that we would be meeting these contractors And this was slowed down on

November 19th when we became aware of the TIF litigation Q November 19th 2004

I m going to represent to you that in your

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Request for Production that Defendants served on you you were asked for the financial feasibility study referenced in paragraph 3 of the Option Contract and you responded or referred us to documents in Production Folder C on feasibility So I m going to

hand you what we can mark as Exhibit F (Defendant Exhibit F Financial Feasibility Q Documents Related to

was then identified )

Is it fair to say after you have a chance

to review Exhibit F that these are the documents

1

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

relating to any financial feasibility study work that was performed? A Yes This appears that this would be the

paper documents that I have from this period Q Okay Were any of the documents in Exhibit

F provided to Defendants? A I don t believe it shows that they are so no unless you know

copied with any of this

this was provided by Eric to them without my knowledge or discussed Q Okay So is it fair to say that you did

not provide a financial feasibility study to Defendants? A We would not have prepared a final

financial study to Defendants Q Exhibit F And if I can refer you to the last page of do you know who prepared this page that s

called Media Box Proposed Program dated August 26th 2004? A Q That would have been Eric I think

And can you explain what information Eric

is setting out here? A This was an expanded program explaining a more muscular project would and so we had

whether or not a larger

be the most commercially effective one

1

1 2 3 4 5 6

asked him to take a look at what that site could handle this obviously looking at the physical aspects of And this was general information kind of a

study of ambitious program development which included underground parking and commercial a plaza and multiple residences

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q

And it says the Estimated Projected Total Is it your

is $5 556 000 and it has an asterisk

understanding that means those are the costs without taking the plaza into account? A Q Yes So looking at this page here correct? this was a

$5 5 million project A a meeting Q Yes

This is a very preliminary piece for

So this is your starting point of where we

are headed with the funding of this project? A No I wouldn t say that because the So what if this would

original proposal is even smaller was a larger project

what would this give you would there be more

this bring in more players interest out there

is this the way to go as I said a very

And so that was just

kind of sketchy study at that time if this project should be expanded

1

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

Q

Okay

So this proposal depicted here shows You

a projected total cost of 5 5 million dollars mentioned a prior smaller version projected total costs -A that time Well

What were the

we did not have that finally done at

So this was just the original proposal

showed a lesser smaller project and there was some interest in what if this was a bigger project these figures were rather frightening Q Okay Is August 2004 the last time you And

recall discussing issues related to financial feasibility of the project? A No because we were in November -- let me We have September 24th going to be

look at the dates

setting up certain meetings with contractors to begin to look at this model that had been developed and designed And those meetings were being set up and

then they were cancelled after we became aware of the litigation which was putting the TIF on hold Q Okay 2004 You mentioned before the TIF litigation Can you explain

November 19th

what you are referring to? A At that time we became aware and not

through Grand Center -- well

Eric Friedman became

aware that there had been a complaint filed alleging

1

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

that the TIF was in violation of a variety of statutes and constitutional amendments And Eric Friedman sent indicated he

me some press clippings regarding that

was going to try to come up with pleadings Q You mentioned to me the complaint filed What project were the TIF

alleging problems with TIF

violations in connection with? A Q What? And maybe that isn t the best question

I m just trying to understand what the complaints were against TIF was it in connection with a specific

development project? A In November as I was arranging meetings for

financial feasibility I was provided by Eric Friedman an article possibly in the Business Journal and maybe another document which indicated that a number of plaintiffs including a Masonic corporation that held property in Grand Center had filed in federal court a complaint against the City of St and a number of parties Louis Grand Center

challenging the Grand Center And previously I

Tax Increment Financing District

had had conversations with Eric Friedman and with Vince Schoemehl regarding the nature of this TIF and that it was important as it related to the development of the Media Box

1

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

Q

And can you explain why it was important to

the development of the Media Box? A Schoemehl and Friedman who were more

learned in the subject of tax increment financing districts suggested that the TIF would allow certain acquisitions and development processes to move forward that might permit a somewhat expanded project Q I think you referenced TIF litigation as a

time you became concerned about the work you were doing on the financial feasibility study? A Q Yes So did the concerns about the TIF go away I m just trying to understand

they didn t go away? A

After November we began to closely monitor And

and engage in kind of a review of the litigation no they didn t go away Q

And the TIF litigation is related to the

issues of Grand Center using its eminent domain powers correct A Again or is that a separate issue? I don t want to talk as a lawyer I

21 22 23 24 25

believe that s separate Q Okay In paragraph 3 of the Option

Contract the third thing it says that you the buyer will do is "prepare a prospective program and content summary " And then in the next paragraph it says that

1

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

you will provide the "prospective program and content summary to Seller for its review and approval " So in your answers to interrogatories -- do you remember preparing answers to written interrogatories? A Q Of course You were asked to identify the prospective

program and content summary references in section 3 that you prepared and provided to Defendants You

said prospective program and content summary were periodically submitted in presentations Draft One

was submitted shortly after meeting with Vince Schoemehl and Emily Pulitzer in August 2003 We previously talked about Exhibit B the second page would this be Draft One? A Q Yes Okay I believe it would be Okay And then in your In

interrogatory answer you next said further program and content summaries was submitted in March 2004 want to show you -MS LUBBEN What exhibit are we on? So I

(Brief discussion held off the record) (Defendant Exhibit G Attached Memo BY MS LUBBEN 3/23/04 Emails &

was then marked for identification )

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Q

Are pages 2

3 and 4 of Exhibit G the memo

that was provided to Defendants in March of 2004? A Let me note that there was a problem with Somehow

the date and that may add some confusion

there was a code problem with the document and the date changed every time it was printed up And so you 2008

can see that there is a date of December 10th Q

So on the first page of the memo it should 2004? yes It should say that yes

say March 23rd A obviously

It should

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q A Q A

Okay Please let me look at this a little Sure This is attached to the March 23rd Yes this would have been prepared at the

time of the signing of the contract -Q A Okay -- not per the terms of the contract

because it proceeded that obviously Q Draft One? A Q A Yes Who made this new version? I would assume this would have been mine in And is this basically a later version of

1

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

conjunction with Eric Q Okay And from page 1 of Exhibit B it

looks like Rebecca Krewson of the Friedman Group forwarded on this memo to Vince Schoemehl A Q A Yes And you were copied on that email? Yes (Defendant Exhibit H then marked for identification ) Q Exhibit H same memo I want to show you the next exhibit which I think is another version of the I just want to try to figure out what the 3/23/04 Memo was correct?

difference is I m handing to you Exhibit H I m going to

represent to you Exhibit H is pretty much the same thing you had attached to your lawsuit in this case And when I compare H to G they look almost similar except H has numbering instead of bullet points and then H is missing the third page of exhibit G A and forth Q Right but do you know if there was any why there are different There was a great deal of paper flying back

reason for the discrepancy versions of this out there? A

Just electronic communications creating --

1

1 2

Q A

Okay -- a certain amount of noise

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

Q

Okay

But this would be the prospective

program and content summary that you gave Defendants in March of 2004 A different Q 2004 Yeah correct? You said the back page was except for the propriety page

Do you know why this back page would have

been omitted from other versions? A Q A No You don t remember doing that? No because as I indicated we actually had No the

a code problem that changed my date on all those Q Okay And if you look at Exhibit G

exhibit with the memo attached Rebecca Krewson the board tomorrow "

it references from

"The attached memo is for you and

We will deliver the concept design

Do you know -- I didn t see an email delivering a separate concept design mean it s not there Do you have a recollection as to what part of the designs would have been delivered in March of 2004? A I m sure she is referring to delivery as That doesn t

1

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

opposed to electronic Q A it Okay So I m well while I physically didn t do

I believe there was a packet that was brought over

to Grand Center with visual information that had been printed up as opposed to a digital transmission Q Okay And now I m going back to your

interrogatory responses in which you describe what the prospective program and content summary is Draft One You said

you said program and content summary

submitted in March of 2004 and then you said the prospective program and content summary was again submitted to Grand Center in the quarterly report in June of 2005 show you A Q 2004 Do I have an error there? but I think you which is the next thing I m going to

You said June 2005

probably meant June 2004 (Defendant Exhibit I Report First Quarterly

was then marked for identification ) Q After you ve had a chance to look at this is this the June 2004 quarterly

my question to you is report? A Q Yes

dated June 2004

Yes

this is it and the

Does this

the March 2004 memo

1

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

Draft One we looked at constitute the prospective program and content summary that you prepared for Defendants? A In terms of paper but then there were a

series of multiple meetings dealing with certain members who are on the board and elsewhere in Grand Center which occurred subsequent to June and where there would be focused discussion of various aspects of this and a critique of what would work and what might not Q Okay So document wise this would be one

of the documents related -A Yes these would be the documents The

only other group of documents would have been given to Joann Lasala post the termination of the condemnation in terms of paper Q Okay And is it fair to say I m going to

refer to these three things that we ve been talking about the architectural concept the financial

feasibility study and the prospective program and content summary I m going to refer to them altogether

as the development documents to make my questions easier A Q Okay The Defendants had the right to review and

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

approve the development documents for the Media Box correct? A Q Correct And did VSRC have discretion to withhold

approval of the development documents if VSRC did not like them? A Q The contract -What is your understanding? Setting aside

the contract was it your understanding that it was within VSRC s discretion to approve them or not approve them? A Or to engage in a discussion whether or not And this was

this was moving in the right direction a conversation that would be ongoing Q

Is it your understanding that if you

couldn t resolve issues with VSRC s approval of the

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

development documents that they could withhold a closing on the Day property had they obtained it? A There s no question that we had a

responsibility to provide program and development documents to them that they would eventually approve

them and that would be the basis for moving forward on this project Q But if you couldn t resolve any issues with

their approval of the development documents they had

1

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 ability to prevent closing on this property correct? A If they didn t like our project we weren t

going to go forward on it Q Correct I want to refer you to the last I m going

paragraph on page 2 of the Option Contract to summarize a little bit option period buyer concepts you

It says during the initial shall deliver architectural

financial feasibility study and prospective

program and content summary to seller for review and approval I m going to skip forward a little bit The next sentence states "All such documents shall

remain the property of Paul Guzzardo and Sung Ho Kim and treated as propriety and confidential " Is it fair to say that that sentence about the documents remaining proprietary and confidential is referring to the architectural concepts the

financial feasibility study and the prospective program and content summary? A Q It says what it says Is there something else that you think it s

referring to when it says "all such documents"? A Q No So it says it remains the property of you

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

and Sung Ho Kim

So is Sung Ho Kim entitled to do

whatever he wants with the development documents? A Q It s not my opinion that he is And what is the basis of your opinion that

he is not entitled to do whatever he wants with the development documents? A On the bases that these documents were in

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

reference to this property and a collaboration of this particular property Q And so it s your understanding that he was

not to use them for other purposes? A Q Yes This was just the Jim Day property

Did you have conversations with Sung Ho Kim

about the fact that he was not to use the development documents for other purposes? A I have not had any conversations with Sung

Ho Kim in five years Q At the time of the contract did you talk to

him -- let me back up Did you have a mutual understanding with Sung Ho Kim that he was not going to use the development documents for anything other than the Media Box project? A Q I think that was assumed Okay You don t recall any conversations

1

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

or communications with him about that? A Q No Okay So if Sung Ho Kim wanted to sell the

development documents to someone it s your understanding based on your assumption that he wouldn t do anything with the documents that he could

not sell the development documents to anyone? A time Q Okay That s fair enough I d never given any thought to it at the

You mentioned before Sung Ho Kim and AxiOme work in relation to a Media Arcade Is it your

understanding that Sung Ho Kim used either the architectural concepts or prospective program and content summary in connection with his Media Arcade project? A The images of the Media Arcade were

identical to the images of the Media Box from what I could see on the website Q Okay When did you view this material on

AxiOme s website? A I cannot give an exact date I saw the

material on AxiOme s website and I also saw the material on the website for the gallery across the street from the Pulitzer which was selling these

1

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

drawings Q A Q And what s the name of that gallery? Yeah I didn t know if you just weren t saying it

or didn t know? A How many proper nouns can one s mind keep

in a four-hour time Q A Sure I don t remember and I should but I don t

remember the name Q Okay Did Sung Ho Kim seek your consent to

use architectural concepts or program summary information from Media Box in connection with his Media Arcade project? A Q No After you saw how he had used Media Box

architectural concepts and program and content summary for his Media Arcade did you contact him -A Q A Q No -- and tell him to stop? No Okay I have not had any communication If VSRC had obtained the Day

property and you had exercised your option then your purchase price would have included all of VSRC s costs in acquiring the property correct?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 BY MS

A

Yes

I believe there was a ceiling

somewhere in the contract in terms of mentioning the cost Q Okay Look at section 4 Unless you want

to stop for a break? (Brief discussion held off the record) (Lunch break was then taken) LUBBEN Q I d like to refer you to Exhibit D on Purchase Price It says "The which is VSRC

paragraph four

Purchase Price for the acquisition by Buyer" you "of the Subject Property from Seller"

"shall be any and all costs insured by seller to acquire title to the Subject Property " And then it okay?

list as additional costs that would be included A Q Yes

So it says it includes "the costs incurred If VSRC tried to

by Seller to acquire title "

negotiate with Day and Day would not sell the property for anything other than $800 000 $800 000 for the property assuming VSRC paid

that amount would have been

22 23 24 25

passed on to you if you exercised the option to buy it correct? A Yes That would have been part of that

line item of the cost

1

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

Q

Did you have any discussions with the

Defendants about putting a cap on that line item cost? A No It was going to be explored through

this negotiation through condemnation Q Okay Is it your understanding that you -say they had to pay

had VSRC obtain the property $800 000

that s what they negotiated with Day to had they done that had they

purchase the property

fulfilled everything they were supposed to do to get the property and provide you with the Option have to exercise the Option or was it at your discretion to exercise the Option once -A discretion Q Okay So if VSRC went out and tried to get Well it appears that it was at my did you

property and the best deal they could get with Day was to buy it for $800 000 if you decided that you didn t

want to exercise your right you didn t have to exercise your option to buy it A Q right?

I would advise them per submission What do you mean by you would advise them

per submission? A Q A I would tell them You would say no thanks? Right

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Q

I m not going to exercise my option In paragraph 5 in the very middle of

okay

paragraph 5 it says

"There may be a need for

governmental approval and/or support which if but for this support this project could not be developed and both parties agree to pursue any and all such agreed upon approvals and support " What is your

understanding as to what the Option Contract is referring to when it says "governmental approval and/or support"? A Well that s probably dealing with the I mean those are the powers of

eminent domain

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

eminent domain

how you acquire the property and how

they use their eminent domain authority to move this project forward Q Okay I want to skip forward I m sorry

actually right where we were

the next sentence says

"Each party shall provide the other party with periodic updates occurring at least every quarter

regarding the status of the Project " I previously asked you questions about the June 2004 quarterly status update Are you aware of

any other written formal quarterly updates similar to the June 2004 one? A No That would have been the only one

1

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 other ones were done through these multiple presentations meetings Q So there wasn t anything in writing it you know these two three hour

wasn t summarized in writing? A No It was just presentations a series of

presentations given by myself or Eric or Sung Ho Q So how many additional quarterly updates

were provided in any form after the June 2004 one? A Well again the date is unclear September

at the Pulitzer Q A September 2004? 2004 to Pulitzer And then there were more

and more regular meetings or calls between myself and other representatives and Eric up until July or August of 2005 So there was just this constant conversation problems loss you know the TIF

going over designs litigation Q

And it was just an ongoing conversation Okay So were any of these additional

meetings or ongoing conversations called a quarterly update? A have been where The only thing and I think was the only one that might but I don t remember

would have been the meeting at the Pulitzer

where there would have been the quarterly update and

1

1 2 3

we d say this is this

we ll just use this

The other

things I m certain would not have Q Okay I want to talk a little bit about

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

the September 2004 meeting at the Pulitzer discussed at that meeting? A Well

What was

at that meeting -- the meeting was you know fill in some of the issues the international

set up for me to

regarding the design of the project

connections that the project could open up and discuss the local players in St Louis who were interested in

participating in the project So I would have the conceptual model Multimedia reviewed first

sort of reviewed my praxis

involving Media Arts and urban design and certain source of projects which could then be extrapolated and further developed and explored at Grand Center So that was part of it We then discussed at length the history of the Grand Center as it relates to the broader picture of digital cultural and digital design throughout the world It would have discussed my presentations

elsewhere which would have included my presentations in New York at Rochester in June presentations at St issues my various

Louis University regarding these

1

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

I think I also included presentations regarding my meetings at the law school at St Louis U So

and then in detail the presentations in Australia you had the praxis which is the practice of digital content which would be the basis you had my attempt

to bring in a national and international audience in design and then the third part would have been Sung Ho reviewing the model which was present at the meeting And we would have shown some of these development drawings as part of the PowerPoint Q Was there any discussion at the

September 2004 meeting about the efforts to obtain the Day property? A Q I do not believe that there was I m going to refer you to paragraph 16 of the fourth line down at the end Ltd or its

the Option Contract says agents

"Any fee owed to Friedman Group

representatives and employees shall be paid which is you correct?

solely by Buyer" A Q Yes

So any costs incurred by Eric Friedman are right?

to be borne by you A Q Yes

Is this referring to costs incurred

if we

can refer back to Exhibit A

does that refer to any

1

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

fees whatsoever incurred by Eric Friedman? A I m not a transactional attorney I don t

want to provide an answer involving legal advice This obviously was something that was in Grand Center s interest to clarify the relationship of Friedman regarding that property and those transactions And it was always my assumption this is

why there was that subsequent agreement proposed by Mayor Clark to deal with the Day property and directed towards Eric Friedman Q So if Friedman incurred any expenses at

your request -A Q paying them? A Q A Q Yes and this was just to clarify Yes -- you were going to be responsible for

That Defendants were not responsible? Yes Okay And this is your signature on the

last page of the Option Contract? A Q March 15th Yes The contract is dated on the first page 2004 After you signed the Option

Contract did you tell anyone that you had entered into this Option Contract?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 know?

A Q A

Of course Okay Well Who did you tell? I don t have that sort of memory

Obviously there have been discussions with Media Arts so Q The Board of Directors of Media Arts would

A would assume recollection

The Board of Directors of Media Arts but again I don t have a specific Things just went on day to day

I

We ve

been working on this for an extended period of time Q Okay But it wasn t a secret that you had

entered into the Option Contract? A Q No No

And it wasn t a secret that you had entered

into the Option Contract in order to further your development of the Media Box?

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 aware

A Q

No

there was no secret at all

Was it your understanding that anyone was

supposed to keep the terms of this Option Contract confidential? A Unless it specifically states it I wasn t

And it wasn t being faxed around the world

It was not even a discussion Q Right okay Yeah I m not aware of it

1

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

containing anything that says you need to keep it confidential otherwise A Q A Q Yeah And was the Option Contract ever amended? No What was your understanding as to how VSRC I was just asking if you thought

was going to obtain the Day property? A Q Eminent domain What is your understanding as to what VSRC

did in furtherance of the eminent domain? A Q They filed the petition for condemnation Are you aware of them also trying to Day to purchase the property

negotiate with Mr

separate from the eminent domain action? A I became aware of that per discovery

provided by Defendants Q Okay In your lawsuit you claim that VSRC

failed to conduct good faith negotiations to acquire the Day property What evidence do you have to

support that Defendants failed to conduct good faith negotiations to obtain the property? A It would appear from documents that were

provided and references which were described and materials that were described in newspaper accounts

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

that the conduct of the Defendant in the negotiations was less than appropriate Q Is there specific conduct that you can

identify that you would consider was inappropriate in how Defendants handled their negotiations? A I would have to go from correspondence to I m not really

correspondence and evaluate those

prepared to go into some of those details

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q A

Okay You know the simple question was

cutting -- the communications seemed to have fallen apart between Day and Grand Center and it aggravated the situation greatly Q So communication problems communication

between Defendants and Day could or should have been better? A Q I think I think so

Is there any other specific conduct that

comes to mind as you sit here? A was fair Q not offer Mr A Is it your contention that Defendants did Day a fair price? This was -- as the records indicate Eric And Well there were issues of pricing and what

Friedman was not involved in the negotiations

1

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

Eric Friedman was the competent

capable person that I

hired to see that this project moved forward and he was excluded Q Okay So is it fair to say that you

believe that Defendants should not have excluded Eric Friedman from their negotiation process -A Q A Q Yeah you know -I m sorry

Let me finish Sorry

Is it fair to say that you believe

Defendants should not have excluded Eric Friedman from their negotiations process with Day? A I engaged Friedman because I felt he was

the person who was capable of moving forward with this subject matter and he was not part of it Q Is there any specific conduct of Defendants

that comes to mind as being inappropriate in connection with their negotiations with Day? A I think closing out Friedman aggravated and

exacerbated many of the problems Q So is it fair for me to summarize the

problems as being Defendant should have had better communication with Day there were concerns about the

pricing or the offers made by Defendants being fair and third an issue with Defendants excluding Eric

1

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

Friedman from involvement? A I think all of those three contributed to

some of the problems Q mind? A Q At this point Okay no Okay Is there anything else that comes to

Did you or any of your

representatives ever obtain an appraisal of the Day property? A Q A No we didn t

Why not? It was just a decision at this time it was

Friedman s decision that would not be necessary to do right now Q A Q And you relied upon Friedman to -Yes What amount do you think Defendant should

have offered Day to purchase his property? A you I don t have a specific figure I can give

I don t have that Q Did you ever have any communications with

Day regarding the purchase of his property? A Q No I did not

Did any of your representatives ever have

any communications with Day regarding the purchase of

1

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

his property? A No unless some of the events in March and

April would have been -- I don t think there was any direct contact with Eric Friedman at any time as far as I know Q A Q With Day? With Day Okay Do you know if Day ever extended a

sale offer to the Defendants for a specific price? A I don t remember that And the only

information I would have would be from your production Q Okay Aside from any appraisal do you have

any evidence of the value of the Day property in the 2004-2005 time period? A Q No I do not

Do you know what Day would have been

willing to take for the property? A Q No not at all

Is it possible that Day didn t want to sell

the property at all? A I don t know that

23 24 25

Q

Do you know if Day was willing to relocate

his business? A I don t know

1

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

Q

Were you involved in any efforts related to

relocating Day s business? A I was not but Eric Friedman entered into

an agreement with Grand Center to provide those services Q Okay I understand that in late 2004

early 2005 there was a lot of attention given to eminent domain and the potential abuse by government entities of eminent domain Do you think that in light of the national media and local media surrounding eminent domain abuses that VSRC should have continued its efforts in the eminent domain action against Day? A Well I feel the Defendants should have

executed my contract Q Okay That s fair How did you expect Did you want them to

them to execute your contract?

pursue the eminent domain action to conclusion? A As the records indicate when Defendants

said they were going to exercise eminent domain I said all right let s try to resolve this through other

properties in Grand Center Q Okay So is it fair to say that it was

acceptable to you that Grand Center cease eminent domain actions when they did?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

A

I would not use the word "acceptable"

I

said I was just advised of what they were going to do I said can we resolve this through other ways Q I understand you were just advised If

instead Defendants had come to you and said should we continue with this eminent domain action what would you have told them? A contract involved I would have said can we execute this is it possible to do it what are the costs

what are the other implications and I would have engaged them in a

complications

conversation on how we can manage this problem Q So it s your testimony that instead they

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

came to you and said they were ending the eminent domain action? A Q Yes And your response was okay let s see if

we can resolve this with some other property and move forward with this project? A Q A Yes So what happened next? That was Vince Schoemehl He said we could

look at other properties and indicated that he felt that these various medias were so critical and so important they needed to be placed somewhere within

1

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 district Q What other properties were considered for

the Media Box? A He talked about what was then called the

Woolworth building with some vague descriptions of other things going on and possibly the non-housing media aspect of the project could be drafted into that building And then he suggested that possibly the

burnt church would be a better site for the project Q Aside from the Woolworth building and the

burnt church were there any other properties that were considered? A There was a third property that was offsite I drove by it but that

on the other side of Grand seemed to fade quickly address Q

And I can t give you the

Was it your understanding that the

Woolworth building was already in possession by Defendants? A Q A Q A Q Yes And the burnt church was as well? Yes And then this third site? I think so yes eminent domain

So as far as you understood

1

1 2 3 4

would not need to be used with any of these three alternative sites? A Q Yes Yes What

So start with the Woolworth building

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

happened? building? A Q A

Who raised the idea of the Woolworth

Vince of course raised the idea Okay And I believe indicated that or we were Club of a

told there were negotiations with the Boys St Louis

This was mentioned to Eric Friedman might have done an

brief conversation with Eric investigation

and he indicated that he thought that

was a problematic structure and would involve very problematic ongoing transactions Q A Q Eric Friedman advises you of that? Yes So discussions about the Woolworth building

ceased after Eric Friedman advised you of that? A Q A Q that? A The burnt church arrangements were made by Yes Okay Yes With the burnt church what happened with These were quick phone conversations

1

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

an employee at Grand Center to give me a tour of the burnt church because it was locked up and access to the public was not allowed for safety reasons So I got a picture I did a series of --

took a series of photos and I did some measurements Then I was sent some drawings which were emailed to me additional site plans of the site as well as the

church There were more discussions with the Schoemehls regarding the original proposal of the burnt church which was a sculpture garden and he indicated that was being jettisoned by Grand Center And I indicated to him that this was an interesting project and we needed to continue the conversation Q What was your opinion about the adequacy of

the burnt church for the Media Box location? A Well it was sufficiently close to the

Pulitzer and the Contemporary to maintain and sustain a certain synergy in terms of the art district and I liked that as a designer I saw some immediate possibilities as it related to content and aesthetics the nature of the

light box and also the kind of ongoing discourse framed within this particular structure and that s why I suggested to Vince that possibly this would be a way

1

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

of resolving the situation we now find ourselves in Q church it What were you envisioning with the burnt

were you going to build some structure within next to it? obviously this was very very

around it A

Well

preliminary

The burnt church suggested a skeletal

form that could be used in a variety of ways for informational systems comparable to work I had already done Q A Q A inside Q space But as far as commercial and residential So it might provide the facade? Multiple facades For light projections Screens you know screens?

content creators housed

was that on your radar with the burnt church? A It wasn t developed that far There was a you

lot which was next to the burnt church which know

suggested at least there could be a discussion

of an annex that might address these issues Q So what happened next in this process with

the burnt church? A Q There were meetings with Joann Lasala What did you discuss with Joann everything

we ve just talked about?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 yes

A

Everything we are discussing right now

Q

Did you discuss with Joann whether to move

forward with the burnt church project or -A Joann was interested in coming up to speed

with some of the conceptual aspects behind the burnt church so she said about the Media Box well I need to know about more

I need to know more about the and why don t you just

ideas of what you have done you know

throw all sorts of the material in my lap She had not been a party or a player in any

of the other meetings or any of the other discussions that involved myself Q Okay Eric or Sung Ho

So did you provide her with the

information she requested? A Q A Yes And then what happened? Then sometime this is maybe over a

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

two-month period of time

three-month period of time

she advised that Grand Center had made a decision that the burnt church was not appropriate developed now it would not be

and that we would like to move the

energy of a Media Box to Grand Avenue Q A And what was your response? It was almost you know this is the way it

1

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

is

thank you very much

I wasn t asked for a

response Q Okay I think you are telling me that she Is that

suggested the Media Box move to Grand Avenue

something you think she was going to work with you to do or? A It was quite unclear to what extent they

were willing to continue to focus on the Media Box as an ongoing project It was clear that the Media Box

moving into the burnt church was no longer on the agenda Q Okay Is that something that Joann told on a phone call? It would not have been a phone call

you in writing A No

It would have been in a meeting Q A Q A meeting with? Joann correct

Would that have been your last contact with

any of the Defendants concerning the Media Box project? A No Vincent Schoemehl and I -- well that

would have been in the summer of 2005 and I had lunch Q

And Schoemehl

I believe it was in April of 2006

And what did you discuss with Vince

Schoemehl at lunch in April of 2006?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

A did not show

It was with Vince and I and Joann I remember that

Joann

And it was what are the possibilities of trying to reopen the discussions so we can create and build certain aspects of the Media Box Center again at Grand

And Vince indicated an interest and said he

would be back with me Q after that? Okay And did you hear from Vince again

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q A Q

I heard from Vince in December of 2006 Okay? Six months later the end of December

And was he contacting you about the Media

Box in December 2006? A He was contacting me about the media He indicated that they all

installations in Grand Center

were going to be moving in a two-stage process series of district projections to you know

which would then lead

inserting projection infrastructures at

multiple locations in the district Q In December of 2006 was there any

discussion of potential locations for the original Media Box concept? A No No It dealt with in some respect

blowing up the Media Box into a series of fragments

1

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

and forms which would then be place in Grand Center Q

you know

snapped into

After the April 2006 lunch with Vince was

there ever any discussions with you and anyone from Defendants concerning the Media Box and a possible location for it? A Q No Do you think that Defendants should have

reinitiated a new eminent domain action against the Day property at any time after they terminated the action in May 2005? A What s it matter what I think They gave

up eminent domain as far as I know have the action Q

They don t even

Assuming they had the ability to assert a

new eminent domain action against Day following the dismissal of the then action in May of 2005 would you

have wanted them to use that power to continue to try to get the Day property with eminent domain? A At that time everything was so tainted it

probably would have tainted the project probably Q Even if they could have gone back and used

eminent domain again to obtain the property are you saying that you might be still facing protestors on your Media Box site had you built it there?

1

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 BY MS

A possibly Q

They d be outside this office right now

Do you believe that the Day property would

be a valuable piece of property for Defendants to have in their possession? A You know certainly from any lay person s

perspective it has a significant impact on the existing developments within the district because of its proximity Q So it could be beneficial for Defendants to

have possession of that property? A Q Appears to be so yes

Do you think the Defendants had any

incentive to try not to get the Day property? A Well -MR LUBBEN Q A Q Let s say in 2005? Any incentive? Certainly -PAPA At what point in time?

In 2005 while they had this opportune

contract with you do you think they wanted to get the property for you? A Yes I believe that you know they were

interested in the acquisition and development of that piece of property and -- yes

1

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

Q

Do you think there was anything preventing

them from being able to get that property for you other than the problems with the eminent domain proceeding? A I m unclear on the term "problems with the

eminent domain proceeding" Q Okay In the spring winter/spring of 05

there was public outcry against the use of eminent domain Had there not been that do you think that

Defendants would have proceeded with the eminent domain action and tried to get the property for you? A The problems in the spring were twofold

One was on the national level basis based upon the Kelo case before the Supreme Court and the others were more local issues which raised issues of that particular property that particular owner and the

nature of certain social and political issues in St Louis Q And that made it difficult for Defendants correct?

to continue with their eminent domain action A

Those were issues which they obviously

explored and made a decision with the basis for termination of the Option Contract

24 25

Q A

Would you have made a different decision? Well --

1

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 Iraq

Q A

I mean

I m just saying --

If I was the President maybe I would bomb

Q

-- you were aware of the national and local

media attention given to eminent domain in 2005 Knowing that would you have decided to have Defendants continue pursuing eminent domain action against Day? A Obviously I understood why Defendants did

what they did and that s why I was so willing to try to be cooperative with them to try to sustain the development of these ideas which I had been working on which I consider part of our national patrimony and put them in Grand Center Q How come you never just called Day to see

if he would sell the property to you? A Q A We were told not to contact Day Who told you not to contact Day? I mean this was told to Friedman the

Friedman Group should not have any direct contact in the negotiations with Day argument Q Prior to entering the Option Contract in And that was part of the

March of 2004 did it ever occur to you before you entered into the Option Contract to just go call Day yourself and try to get the property?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 unclear ongoing

A

No

because I was aware of that there was

whether or not the pleadings had been filed

discussions between Grand Center and Day and I had no intention of disrupting that and was advised we would not be doing that Q the process So you knew Defendants had already started even before their idea merged with yours

they had already started the process of trying to get the Day property? A How much I knew when I knew it it s very

Most of the information I have on that has

come through your discovery Q A Okay? But I would have known some small fragments

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

of that Q And can you tell me generally what s your

understanding of the benefits to you of purchasing the property through an Option Contract with Defendants as opposed to you just going out and trying to get it on your own how is it better for you to do it by having clean it up and give it to you? so it

Defendants get it A

That s the situation I walked into

wasn t really a question of what s better what it was when I was called in this they wanted me Okay?

That s

They were doing

1

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 them BY MS

Q

So you didn t feel you had the option to go

talk to Day directly? A Q Not unless I had a time machine Okay I want to go back to the three

things that you identified THE WITNESS MS LUBBEN I want to take a break Oh sure Sure

(A short break was then taken) LUBBEN Q A while back you identified three things

that you think that Defendants should have done differently in connection with obtaining the property You said they should have communicated better with Day Did you ever tell Defendants that you wanted

them to do a better job of communicating with Day? A Friedman I know discussed with Defendants

his background and ability to deal with relocation and properties of this sort -Q A Okay -- given his background and so advised

Q for that? A Q

So you would have relied on Eric Friedman

Yes As far as pricing you talked about them

1

1 2 3 4 5

not offering a fair price or not offering enough of a price Is that another thing -A Q A Yes -- you would have relied upon Eric -Yes

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

Q Defendant? A Q A Q

-- to communicate any problems back to

Yes And then the same for Eric s involvement? Yes Did you rely on Eric to deal with any

communications with Defendants about getting more involved? A Q Correct Other than those three things and the other

-- other than what we ve talked -- aside from everything we ve already talked about is there anything else that you think Defendants should have done differently or additionally to get that property for you? A Q A Q And what was so alleged in the pleadings And in the pleadings? Yes Okay Nothing else comes to mind other

than what we ve talked about and what s in the

1

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

pleadings? A Q Yes Okay As far as finding Day a suitable is that something Eric Friedman

alternate location

would have been involved in? A Q Yeah he would be the expert on that you weren t

But you don t have information

involved in trying to find Day an alternative location A were you? Other than being copied and discussing with

Eric his efforts to do so Q Okay Your petition your lawsuit says

that "Plaintiff was damaged by the loss of fees payments and earnings to which he was entitled pursuant to the Option Contract" What are you referring to? What fees

payments and earnings do you believe you were entitled to under the Option Contract? A three words I guess the word "earnings" these are

earnings I guess we would talk about That s the only word I

realizing certain profits know

I can t distinguish the other words Q Okay So is it your contention that you

lost potential profits? A If the property had been developed one

1

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

would hope that there would be a profit at the other end Q As you sit here today can you tell me what

that profit would be? A That s difficult I do know that the

appraisal showed a substantial appreciation in the property in 2007 Q So when you say lost profits and you refer

to the appraisal you are talking about you might have had profit and the Day property was worth a certain amount in 04- 05 and then in 2007 You -say it was worth

$425 000 dollars? A

That simply would be the basis for further

development and growth of that property with potential then for further profits Q Okay Aside from potential profits is payments and earnings that you

there any other fees

feel you ve missed out on under the Option Contract? A Well yes in that I ve not been able to

develop and continue the development of the praxis that I had been working on since basically 1996 97

thru the termination of the agreement and that has had an implication Q or consequences

Is there any way to put a value on your --

is there any way to put a value on your lost ability

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

to further develop your praxis? A I mean obviously that s difficult I have

been lecturing on my praxis around the world the last two to three years Europe around the world South America

United States

And there s always the cutoff

when the urban kind of praxis research and development confronts the events in this contract or the events surrounding this lawsuit (Defendant Exhibit J Jake Wagman Article

was then marked for identification ) Q A Exhibit J can you identify this?

This is a printout from the Wagman article

on the Media Box Q In your lawsuit you refer to publication of 2005 in the

the Jake Wagman article on January 31 Post-Dispatch to? A Q Yes

Is this the article you are referring

And to your understanding this was written

20 21 22 23 24 25

by Jake Wagman? A Q Correct And have you ever had any communications

with Jake Wagman? A There was email -- and how my memory fades Do I indicate a phone call in

There was a phone call

1

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

my answers?

And I just -- or a phone message?

Maybe

there were just phone messages clear Long day (Defendant Exhibit K Email

I just want to be

1/20/05 Friedman

was then marked for identification ) Q Okay Exhibit K looks like an email from Eric does

Eric Friedman to you and Margie Newman indicate his call "

"Jake called me at 3 30 and I did not return So it appears that Jake called Eric correct?

sometime on or before January 29th A Q A message Q a message? A Q A Yes Okay Yes

Do you remember if Jake also called you? You know he may have called me and left a

So Jake may have called you and left

Do you remember calling Jake back? No No I don t remember calling him back

or having spoke man I m sure Q

I would have never spoken to the

Have you ever had a phone call

a phone

conversation with Jake? A Q No Either before or after his article?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A Q

No Okay

no

never

yeah

But before the article Eric told you

that Jake had called him? A Q his call Yes Okay And Eric said that he did not return Why didn t you

Why didn t -- I m sorry

return Jake s phone call? A Because it was very confusing and I did not

voluntarily want to walk into a hornet s nest Q Were you relying on Eric Friedman to handle

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

any communications with the media regarding the Media Box? A Yes We hadn t gotten to that point yet

I m quite adept in dealing with media Q Okay Prior to Exhibit J being published

in the Post-Dispatch it came to your attention that Jake Wagman was calling you and Eric trying to get information A Q A right? Yes Did you know why Jake was calling? I believe there was an email passing

between Eric and Vincent Schoemehl which should have been one of the exhibits and that would have been more descriptive of the nature of the call Q Okay Well let s just look at that then

1

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

(Defendant Exhibit L then marked for identification ) Q Okay

Series of Emails

was

I m handing you Exhibit L

So if we

go to the very end there s a Saturday 2005 email 10 59 a m A Q

January 29th

from Vince to Eric?

Or from Eric to Vince I m sorry from Eric to Vince "Vince And it

looks like Eric is saying

what do you want

Paul and I to do about the article that Jake Wagman is working on?" And then Vince responds Vince pastes in

the message he got from Jake Wagman and is telling Eric this is the message that I got Vince says It looks like

"I sent him your way to explain what a

Media Box is " And then it looks like Eric forwards this chain of emails to you and Margie Newman on Saturday January 29th 2005 at 1 14 p m So did you have discussions with Eric about whether someone was going to call Jake Wagman back and explain to him what a Media Box is? A All of these would have come in within a maybe all at the same time --

couple of hours Q A Okay

-- message from him in layers of emails

1

1

And there was a discussion that we re not the ones to

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

discuss this project with him at this time Q Okay Before the article was published did

you know that Jake Wagman wanted someone to explain to him what a Media Box is? A Yes before it was published Obviously

there was a message to that effect Q Okay And once you knew that you didn t correct?

call Jake Wagman back A Q back No

I didn t

And Eric Friedman didn t call Jake Wagman

did he? A Q No Why didn t either one of you call Jake

Wagman back to explain what a Media Box is? A do that Well we had -- Grand Center had staff to

Michelle Cohen had worked with me on media

projects for almost two years Q So you wanted someone from Grand Center to

be the one to explain to Jake Wagman what a Media Box was? A Yes but I don t think at that time the

focus was answer question A as opposed to question B It was all kind of a maelstrom which blurred with what s going on

1

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

Q

Okay

But I m looking at Exhibit L and

Vince wrote to Eric and said -- he posts the inquiry and he says "I sent him your way to explain what a So you knew and Vince told you that right?

Media Box is "

Jake Wagman wants to know what a Media Box is There s no question about that? A Q I guess

But you and Eric Friedman decided not to

call Jake Wagman back because you wanted the Defendants to explain what a Media Box is? A I think that s a reasonable statement that

we felt it appropriate for them to represent their Grand Center program than for us as still a distant developer to do it Q A distant developer? whose baby was that The Media Box

the Media Box concept?

Who had worked on that for years and years? A Yeah it s collaborative I had worked

with Michelle Cohen and she s their communications specialist She s the Vice President of 2004 She

probably knew more about it than anybody but me Q So it s fair to say you did have the but you felt it

opportunity to talk to Jake Wagman

was better to have Defendants in on those

25

communications

is that correct?

1

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 know

A Q

Yes In your lawsuit you allege that the Jake

Wagman article heavily criticized Plaintiff and falsely identified him as responsible for the eminent domain actions against the Days and Royal Auto Repair Incorporated Where in this Exhibit J this article

does it identify you as being responsible for the eminent domain actions? A There s a tenor throughout the article you

that left that impression with so many people

and so one assumes that that s the nature of the text Q Okay I want to look at the article I m

just going to go to the third little paragraph on the front It says "An agency backed by the city is

preparing to take Day s business by eminent domain " A Q A Q The third paragraph in the front? Yeah Oh it s right there okay Fine Fine

"An agency backed by the city is preparing

to take Day s business by eminent domain to make way for something called a Media Box "

Is there any question in the sentence that the entity that s taking the business by eminent domain is an agency backed by the city? A The sentence speaks for itself you know

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Q

If we go to the last paragraph it says

"The redevelopment plan passed in 2002 by the Board of Aldermen names Grand Center as master developer

giving the agency broad and almost unilateral powers to control land use of the agency As president and chief executive

Schoemehl is the mini-mayor of a swatch

of midtown roughly the size of 20 Busch Stadiums Grand Center can approve or reject building designs dispense up to $80 million in tax incentives and acquire land by eminent domain " Is there anything in that paragraph that you think implicates Media Box? A Q I m not mentioned in that paragraph Right So nothing in that paragraph is

identifying you or Media Box?

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q

In that paragraph Okay

no I m

I want to go to the third page "After Day rejected

going to the fourth paragraph the second offer

an arm of Grand Center filed a It is pending

lawsuit to have the property condemned in St Louis Circuit Court "

Is there anything about that paragraph to suggest that you were involved in -A Q My name is not there What specific sentences or paragraphs in

1

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

this article do you believe identify you as being responsible for the eminent domain actions? A Q Certain people that read it indicated such So it s your testimony that people read

this and after reading this they thought you were responsible for bringing the eminent domain action? A Q A Yes Who are those people? That information was provided in some of

the discovery or some of the lists served Q Do you believe that the Defendants made any

false statements to Jake Wagman about you? A I don t know what all the statements are

the Defendants made to Jake Wagman Q So you don t know if Defendants made any

false statements to Wagman about you? A Q Other than what I allege in the pleading Okay Are there statements in this article

that you believe are false? A I mean there s certain things in this so I can t

article I don t have the background on answer that Q

I want you to read this article and if

there is anything you do have background on and you know it s false or inaccurate I want you to identify

1

1 2 3 4 5 6

those for me MR PAPA The second page has a paragraph

that is specifically about you BY MS LUBBEN Q A Yeah Yeah And just take your time the only thing that talks about me

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

that I would know is what I said postmodern standard-bearer used as a point of ridicule okay? Q A Q

You know it s

what that ever means

That s not a statement

Were you ever an asbestos lawyer? I did some asbestos work Would you consider yourself to be a

multimedia artist? A Q You could use that as part of a tab Okay You ve been involved in creative

presentation of images? A Q Correct Including projecting the last episode of

"Seinfeld" on the side of a building on Washington Avenue? A Q A Q I was part of a consortium And you owned interactive nightclub Cabool? Correct Where dance moves were broadcast over the

1

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

internet A Q

is that correct? We tried to " I have an interest and kind of obsession Guzzardo said

with information culture and urbanism

recently - although he also refused to discuss the Media Box " A Q That s correct Do you remember making that quote to him or do you know where

did you say that to someone else that came from? A You know

this answers the question I had to have

It s

been a long day and so many things

been on the phone with him to have said that Q A Okay That makes sense I

That would have been the only -- yes

would have had to be on the phone Q And that would have been before he

published this article? A Q A Q A Q paragraphs Yes Do you know what the timing was? It s all within probably 48 hours Okay Yes Okay I want to refer you up a couple "But last week Michelle Cohen maybe

It says

1

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

a public relations executive recently hired by Grand Center said the Media Box is a building that will

hold a design studio and apartments or condominiums " A Q Where are you? On the second page right in the middle

there is a paragraph that begins with "But" A Q accurate? A point Q And "The Media Box is really the working At that time it seems to be reasonably on Yes Is Michelle s statement correct is it

title for the design studio piece of it " Cohen said Is that an accurate statement at the time of this article? A Q That seems fine So aside from -- I just want to know is

there any information here that you know to be inaccurate? A Q No After you became aware of the article in

Exhibit J who did you discuss the article with? A Q article? Everyone I can t you know

Did you talk to Eric Friedman about the

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ago

A Q

Yes Did you talk to anyone associated with the

Defendants about the article? A No I would not have -- there s an email so yes

from Schoemehl regarding Jake Wagman to me of course

And as days went on when I had other

meetings I would have discussed it with Schoemehl and I would have discussed it with Joann Lasala I m sure Q Aside from you and Vince and Eric Friedman

do you know anyone else that Wagman contacted about the Media Box prior to writing his article? A Q A Well I know he contacted Margie Newman

Who is Margie Newman? She is a reporter -- not a reporter Louis a

journalist with Living St Q

Why was -- this email we looked at a minute where Eric is forwarding you and why was Margie Newman

Exhibit L

Margie Newman Vince s email

included in your conversations with Eric about Jake Wagman s efforts to contact you?

21 22 23 24 25

A

I don t quite recall the sequence

but I

know that Jake contacted Margie Newman because she s on the Board of Media Arts Q Okay So as a fellow reporter/journalist

he thought maybe she could get some information?

1

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 lines?

A

Well she s on the Board of Media Arts (Defendant Exhibit M 1/31/05 Newman Email

was then marked for identification ) Q A Okay Can you identify this?

It s from Margie Newman to Paul Guzzardo

Eric Friedman and Sung Ho Kim Q A Q And this is after the article came out? Yes Why do you think Margie writes "I m glad

Media Arts was not mentioned "? A organization Q Media Arts -- and it looks like Margaret "You might consider making Well because we did not want to slam our

Newman suggested Paul/Eric

a simple statement along those lines if pressed further And she has a quote there "The acquisition

of the land

including determining the amount offered Had we known

was handled exclusively by Grand Center the specifics

we would not have approved of the way

it was handled " Was some statement ever issued along those

A Q A

No Why not? Because we did not want to toss fuel on the

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

fire Q Okay Now it s true that the Day property right?

was being obtained for the Media Box A Q Yes

So I guess I don t understand what it is --

I don t understand what it is that Defendants or Vincent Schoemehl did in connection with this article that you are really complaining about A They did not clarify the fact that Friedman

and Guzzardo had absolutely nothing to do with any of the negotiations or participate in the negotiations

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q

Where in the article does it say that Paul

Guzzardo or Eric Friedman are involved in the negotiations to obtain the Day property? A Q negotiations It s implicit It s just implicit

Regardless of being involved in the the result of Defendants obtaining the

Day property would be for you to put the Media Box there right? A Q Media Box A Yes So you wanted the Day property for the right? Grand Center wanted my ideas for the site

of the Day property Q You didn t want your ideas?

1

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

A

That s fine

yes

but they came to me

because they wanted my ideas Q A And you agreed that that was a good idea? And that location seemed appropriate given

the master plan for Grand Center Q Day property So you wanted to have your Media Box on the but you wanted to separate yourself from

any negotiations Defendants had in getting that property? A They had already begun condemnation as far

as I know when they came to me Q Do you believe that Defendants should not

have told Jake Wagman that a Media Box was ultimately going to be placed on the Day property if they obtained the Day property? A Q A Q No of course not

They could say that? Yes Okay Did you or -- do you know if Eric

Friedman had any additional contacts with Jake Wagman after the article was published? A I don t think so MS if that s okay THE WITNESS Okay LUBBEN Let s take like a quick break

1

1 2 BY MS

(A short break was then taken) LUBBEN

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 It says BY MS memo

Q

Let s switch gears

Let s took at this

I don t remember what we marked it as MR LUBBEN Q Yes Exhibit H Okay PAPA It looks like H maybe

I think you told me that as of March 2004 this memo accurately describes the Media Box concept correct? A Q Yes Okay This is what was submitted There are numbers 1 yes

2 3 on the top

"The imaging technologies to be used may 1 rear projection systems "

include the following

Is that a technology that had been used in other places as of 2004? A Q Sure Sure flat display

And what about number two

panel systems? A Q A Q technologies A Yes That had been used elsewhere as of 2004? Yes And what about the alternative imaging such as electronic paper technologies? These were being explored Much of this I

1

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

should add

was being explored in designs and kind of And that was an

a reprogram design for the MetroLink

ongoing discussion with MetroLink who had indicated an interest and had hired some of us to come up with some of the new technologies that might be used to create a new arts and transit model for the expansion extension of that MetroLink Q So the technologies listed in 1 2 and 3

weren t unique to just the Media Box? A Oh no Just state-of-the-art in terms of

projection and information Q So others throughout the world were using

these technologies in 2004? A Yeah at various levels Obviously option

3 was very cutting edge Q says Okay

and flat panel of course the second sentence

And what about

"Digital imaging technology systems will be

incorporated and configured into the facade of the building " A Q Second sentence of the memo? Second sentence yeah Was that component

unique to Media Box or had you been aware of other projects and people elsewhere in the world using this technology onto the facade of buildings? A People were exploring these sorts of

1

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

technologies

yes

in various aspects

I

myself

was

dealing with projection technologies and screens in the media lab project Q So the concepts in the March 23 2004 memo

it was a unique combination of various technology specific to your Media Box project but is it fair to

say that the technology and the concept of projecting onto the facade of a building were concepts that were used elsewhere? A years Used elsewhere I had used it for ten

People were exploring these things everywhere Q Okay What components of the Media Box

made it unique from any other project you were ever aware of? Is it the fact that it was going to be in What made it unique from

the Grand Center location?

other projects that you were aware of as of March 2004? A know Well this is what I lecture on And you

I give these two-hour lectures on how you use how you use public space and how

digital creatives

you use these hardware systems and how you use software systems in a recumbent way to generate an ongoing public fears Q discourse

I think in your discovery responses you

said as of March 2004 you had lectured to other people

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

throughout the world on the concept of the Media Box to a large amount of people? A Yes I don t know if I said I had done I gave lectures before and

those most -- you know

I ve given a lot more lectures subsequent Q Okay And the lectures before would have

contained some of the -- you would have discussed some of the components that are in this memo? A Q Yes Because you were developing those in the correct? Correct Correct

years proceeding 2004 A Q Yes

of course

The architectural concepts that we I understand Sung give

identified previously as Exhibit E

Ho Kim developed those in the 2004 time period or take

Once you had these were the designs also

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

something that you presented and discussed in your various lectures when you talked about Media Box type issues? A question You are asking me just so I know the

you are asking me which of these images here Louis?

have I used in lectures outside of St Q A collage Yes

I would probably use one of these in a

1

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 is -2005 or

Q A Q A

And you are referring to the model -The model --- of the Grand Center area? And the locations varied but I would use

Grand Center as the site of the emergence of new media theory 1930 s and 1940 s so I would use that image I don t

I don t think I ve used these even know if I ve used this in Australia at length Q A Q 4? A Q A 2004 Okay I used this Okay 243 I mean

I did use this

but that was early

And that s number 243?

And that s when you went to Australia in

I used this one which has the

Secret Baker content on it Q A And that would be number 248 in Exhibit E? Yeah Because I sometimes present the

Media Box in terms of the Secret Baker protocol when I will lecture on the Secret Baker protocol Q A Okay And then I occasionally use this which

Q

259?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

A Grand Center

259

which has the intersection of the theater district the Great

you know

White Way and St the idea Q

Louis University when I discussed

So you would have discussed the items we

referenced when you were in Australia in 2004? A Some of them It s possible this wasn t

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

even done then Q A Q A Q

you know

I don t know

But you know you discussed them somewhere? Yes Outside of St Yes Okay Tell me what is the Media Ecology Louis?

Conference at the Rochester Institute of Technology? A That was just a conference where I gave a

presentation at Q A Q That was June of 2005? 04 June 2004 I m sorry And did you discuss

some of the Media Box concepts at the -A Q Yes I m sorry I know we could go faster but I

want to make sure we have a clean record Did you discuss some of the Media Box concepts at the Rochester Institute of Technology

1

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

Conference? A Q Yes Somewhere I saw a reference to you Berkley

discussing Media Box with a scholar from U C Does that ring a bell? A Q That would be Jasmin Aber

And did you share some of the ideas about

Media Box concept with Jasmin Aber? A Q church Correct Okay We talked already about the burnt

What features from Exhibit H in your

discussion of the Media Box did you propose inserting in the burnt church? but I mean I know we touched on it before

are there parts of this memo that you can

say this is what I was thinking? A church Q A Okay? So there was never a fully developed idea Well the design never went forward on the

but I understood the spacial ramifications of the church in these sorts of projects and I saw the possibilities of what could be done and how it could be done Q Did you provide Defendants any written

materials concerning your ideas for the burnt church?

1

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 Emails

A

Yeah

There were certain ideas that had to And I just have to try to think And I think

go through memos Writings

discussions with Joann Lasala

there are some things in emails

If there is any

writings it would have been produced for you Q That s fine everything A Q Okay Okay That s what I need to know

I m not expecting you to remember but -Yes In your lawsuit you reference a memorandum

that you prepared for the Defendants in response to a January 2007 request from Vince Schoemehl about a light projection project I want to show you some

emails and see if we can confirm that it s what you are referring to in your lawsuit (Defendant Exhibit N Projection Project

was then marked for identification ) Q So do you recognize this on page 1 from

Vince Schoemehl to you? A Q A Q A Q Yes That s your email zio11? Zio Zio? Yes Okay So it looks like Vince wants to talk

1

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

to you about a lighting and projection project Further down on his email he says "We re looking at

starting with projections onto several walls/surfaces in Grand Center and then as a second phase placing art Walls on the superstructures on top of the Club

Riviera Building and The Fox and other buildings " Do you know if these items he s referencing ever came to fruition? A I think so I know they ve done some

projection projects intermittently Q You are not familiar with anything

involving the Club Riviera Building or The Fox? A Q No No You said

So you responded on January 2nd

you are traveling

I think if we turn the page 2007 at 12 34 Who is

ultimately it looks like on January 4

you followed up with Vince and Peter Bunce Peter Bunce? A Q A

Peter Bunce is a member of the board Of Grand Center? Yes and VSRC you know all those boards

22 23 24 25

Q requested

Okay

And you respond

you say

"As

here s a summary regarding my new media and

urban practice " Is the summary the information that is

1

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

contained on page 3 and 4 of Exhibit N? A he wanted Yes It s just a quick additional summary but he said give And

He had material already

me something fast and easy that I can walk with this summary also was accompanied by a series of images which I believe are referenced here Q Yeah

Do you know what they would look I think I was having I think they are I just couldn t see

like or what they would be?

trouble figuring out what they were probably in with what you gave me where they came directly after this A

Portable System - Two Images -COURT REPORTER Please speak up just a

little bit A

sir It says "One is a flood wall projection so that s a projection

installation " Volkswagen mo-bile BY MS "

"I transformed a VW"

"into a multimedia audio video

So there would have been an image of that

LUBBEN Q A A photo? Yeah a photo And the second is a Remix

Truck Q A Q So it would have been two photographs? Yes Okay Two photographs yes

Are you -- I want to refer you to --

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

I m going to hand you a copy of your petition (Defendant Exhibit O marked for identification ) Q I m looking at Count II which is on page 7 Petition was then

through 9 of Exhibit O? A Q Yes And my ultimate question is going to be in

paragraph 47 you say that Defendants appropriated your propriety and confidential designs know what you are talking about there And so I want to So if you need

to read Count II so you know where that allegation falls in the lawsuit take your time and do that

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A

This is directed towards the church Go ahead

Q

Okay

So in paragraph 47 I think you are

claiming in Count II that you think the Defendants misappropriated some of your designs Where in what context do you believe

Defendants did that? A Well I think on this one count all my

focus and attention is the church Q A Okay? I don t think I m talking about anything

else here other than the church Q You reference this January 10 2007 email

1

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

correspondence as well

So I wasn t sure if you have

two problems with Defendants using your designs? A Obviously at the time of the church

installation Grand Center had initiated a series projection on the rear of the Contemporary And those you

projections as a way of animating the district know

were also subject to my earlier description and

my earlier memos And I believe at the time of the filing those were the primary public demonstrations of my praxis that was done in the district Q Okay So your complaint under Count II Grand Center had a

here is that the Defendants

series of projections on the rear of the Contemporary Art Museum and that you believe they used some of your concepts inappropriately in doing that? A Q Yes What was the time period of when Grand

Center did these projections on the rear of the Contemporary Art Museum? A It was at the same time that the church was

turning the lamp project which was -- was it 2009? The summer and fall of 2009 Q Okay Was that -- is this lamp project

part of a bigger -- one component of a series of

1

1 2 3

projects that were done together?

I m familiar with is

the light project or the community light project that what we re talking about here?

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

A Q A Q

Yes

There were a series of components

Different components together? Yes Okay So you were taking issue with the because I understand I think is

church component of it

some artists came in and put lamps in the church that what we re talking about? A Q That s the church component correct

And then the other component you are

concerned about is some projections on the rear of the Contemporary Art Museum? A Q Correct And your claim here is that those two

components of whatever this light projection project was were based on your concepts and ideas? A Q Correct And you should have been compensated for

A Q components Exhibit H

Correct Okay With respect to the church what aspects of

the church light project your Media Box memo

were used in the

1

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

church project? A Well of course they were discussing

offering multimedia artists a venue to display works -Q I m sorry So can I take that one back? the second 1 offering

number 1

multimedia artists a venue to display work? A artists Q yes Okay What else from this memo was used in It would be a platform for multimedia

the church project? A Expanding the audience obviously for

multimedia art There were aspects of it which I found to be somewhat lame but they were still attempting to

create an intriguing presentation of visuals with a focus on the arts and community Q A And what number is that one? The next one 3

They were creating a new social space around the church to have events around the church by in this case introducing light but not introducing

information networks

but it was a new social space

Those would be the primary sort of brief or program

1

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 systems

Q

So 1 through 4 were the program aspects

from your memo? A Q Certain program aspects yes

Is that what you would refer to as bullet the program aspects?

points 1 through 8 A Q

Of course So you are saying 1 through 4 were used in

the church lamp project? A Q Yes Did the church lamp project use rear projection systems? Use an alternative light system So it didn t use your projection I m

looking up at 1 A Q No Okay

Did it use flat display panel systems? A Q No it did not

Did it use some alternative display imaging

technology? A Q A Q A Q No it did not it s kind of broad

So it didn t -- I mean No It used lamps It used lamps right?

So it didn t use items in 1

2 or 3 which your

would be part the technology part of it concepts right?

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 itself?

A

Or this specific 1

2

3

I talk about

light and I talk about illumination in other emails and in other contexts throughout my discourse with Grand Center Q Okay But with respect to this document by

A

It did not include 1

2

3 per this

document of 2004 Q A Q A Q Okay Or the first 1 2 3

The technology components? Yes With respect to the program components you

think it used 1 through 4? A Q Yes And then let s move on to the projections Which of

on the rear of the Contemporary Art Museum

18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

the technology components did it use? A rear Q You are saying that what Grand Center did I mean these were front projections not

on the Contemporary was front projections? A Q systems They were all front projections Okay number 2? And what about flat display panel

1

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

A flat display Q A Q

Yes

It used flat display

There was a

What about technology 3? I m not aware of that And then what program aspects from your

memo do you believe were incorporated into the Grand Center projections on the rear of the Contemporary Museum? A Clearly 1 2 3 and there was a creation of 2 3

the new social space through 1 Q A Q A So 4 too? Aspects of 4 Aspects Well okay

Is there anything else?

the other thing would be more so 6

which applies more to the Contemporary than to the church creating a venue which would allow the

development of partnerships between arts and the community Q Okay So it s your contention that Grand

Center was responsible for putting on this light project that involved the church project and the projections on the Contemporary Art Museum? A That was the impression from the press

And that is to some extent the impression that was given to me by Vince Schoemehl in the year or two

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

years before Q Okay What is your understanding as to the

relationship between the Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts and Grand Center Incorporated? A Where does one begin? Emily Pulitzer is on

the board or was on the board Q She is on the board of Grand Center

Incorporated?

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q

Yes And do you know her official title with the

Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts? A the board I think at one time she was the -- she s on whether or not at one time she was the

president of the board I don t know Q Okay So is it your contention that

Defendants took the information in your memo and gave it to the artists who prepared the church lamp project and the Contemporary Art Museum projection project? A Q I doubt that very much Okay So what did Defendants do with your

memo that you are complaining about in your lawsuit? A This memo does not stand alone It s a

series of memos and a vast amount of emails describing how why information system technologies can be used

as a new grammar to animate Grand Center

1

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 sharing

There is simply no way I could reference anything in this memo outside of this tsunami of documents and conversations between myself and Grand Center over a two to three-year period of time Q Okay And the documents that you were

the documents and information that you were that same information was

sharing with Grand Center

the type of information that you were lecturing to others about correct that you were discussing in correct?

your lectures in the years before 2004 A Q Aspects Okay Aspects

So what do you think happened?

What

evidence do you have to show that it was Defendants who took either this memo or other information you gave them and it was because of their actions that there are two art projects out there that contain some of what you claim to be your ideas and concepts? A Prior to the church and Contemporary

installations on more than one occasion Vince Schoemehl said that the ideas regarding information projection were probably the best ideas that he had run into in terms of the creative art as they were to relate to the future of Grand Center And he thanked me on a number of occasions for having the foresight and the background and the

1

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

patience to put together a program for the execution of the development of these ideas And this was done prior to any of the introduction of these technologies into Grand Center and these dates and would have first been developed on an aggressive basis by me in the Pulitzer Projection of December of 2004 Q So briefly December 2004 the Pulitzer

Projection is a project you did with the Pulitzer Foundation of Arts? A Q A Q what? A They were double projections They were Correct And this was a New Year s Eve project? Correct And you projected images or video onto

done to two walls on Pulitzer Q anyone? A There were multiple correspondence And there were I Did you have a contract for that work with

organized it through Media Arts

emails saying that certain payments were to be made which were paid to the arts and then I believe were paid to the projection company don t recall the details Some of that may -- I

but it was a step by step

1

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

paper trail to organize the players the money and the disbursement Q Okay So do you think that Vince Schoemehl

or Emily Pulitzer or someone else from Defendants took some of the information you shared with them and gave it to the artists who came up with these burnt church projects and the projection projects? A You know I have no way of knowing what was given to these artists

information was projected I have no way of knowing Q

So as you sit here today you believe

Defendants misappropriated your Media Box concept because you saw these other two projects that have components that you believe coincide with the Media Box project A Q A Q is that correct? I think the pleadings speak for that issue Is that a correct statement? Yes That s what s in the pleadings

But you don t have any evidence that anyone

associated with the Defendants either verbally shared information about your ideas or shared any of your Media Box memos with anyone outside of Defendants

23 24 25

organizations A

do you?

I have no information whether or not any of

my documents were given to the artists who

1

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

participated in those events Q And you don t know if any of the Defendants

verbally shared any of the information you gave them with the artists participating in the light project? A at this time (Defendant Exhibit P Materials Q was then identified ) Okay I have some materials about The Light Project I ve not been provided any evidence of that

something called the light project from September 4th to October 17th 2008 It references a project Is

involving 289 lamps in a Spring Avenue Church that the project we ve been talking about? A Q Correct Okay I think you mentioned 2009

Could

it have been 2008? A Q here Okay Are you familiar with the artists Yes I m sorry

I know I m asking you for a lot of details

Rainer Kehres and Sebastian Hungerer? A Q Only as a result of this installation Have you ever had any contact with either

of those artists? A No

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Project

Q

It s my understanding that the project at

the burnt church involved 289 lamps collected from the St Louis community Did any of the information or

concepts you shared with Defendants involve use of old lamps? A Q Not specifically I m looking at the materials for The Light There is reference to a project called the black and

Crystal World with two-channel 3D animation white silent It describes site-responsive

installation at the southern facade of the Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts complaining about? Is that a project you are

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A pleadings Q

I ve not discussed that project in the

Okay

There is a reference to an Constructed Light and

exhibition of Dan Flavin

organized in connection with the Contemporary Art Museum Do you know if that is the project that you

believe implemented some of your ideas? A That would be -- no That s the overriding The individual

project that went on for nine months projects were part of that project Q Okay

Did the Media Box concept involve

use of solar panels or solar power?

1

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 BY MS second

A

Well

it could

I mean

we were not at

that level of construction drawings or development Q scaffolding? A Those are design issues which would have I ve used scaffolding in yes It s part of the Did your Media Box project involve

been further developed

other installation projects

grammar that I use in theaters and in clubs Q Is that something that you had used in

conjunction with the Media Box? A Well I mean the Media Box wasn t built

So this would have been part of my menu and protocol as a designer which I had done in other projects Q What about bucket sculptures and lighting was that a concept?

using buckets A Q

I ve not used buckets yet So -THE WITNESS Off the record for just one

(Brief discussion held off the record) LUBBEN Q So what evidence do you have that the

Defendants used your Media Box concepts in relationship to these other projects? A I think the record is replete in terms of

1

1 2 3 4

what I ve produced regarding the nature of interjecting this kind of control of lamps in illuminating Grand Center I m probably one of the first people to do

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

it in an exacting way at the Pulitzer installation in December And there is a clear kind of analog between what was done in these other projects in 2008 and what I had earlier developed what I had showed to Pulitzer

and Schoemehl and Paul Ha in 2003 and 2004 and the eventual light project that showed up in 2008 Q Okay Other than you are there any other

people who would have knowledge about Defendants improper use of your Media Box ideas? A Well anyone who was copied in any of the

documents which have been provided to you would have some background in what I just described and discussed Q What damages are you seeking in connection

with the Defendants using your Media Box concepts for these other two projects we ve been talking about? A Q A The currency of the realm Can you describe what you mean? Some compensation for use of the ideas

given the fact that they had compensated the various

1

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

artists to provide those services to Grand Center Q So you would measure the damages due to you

by looking at whatever amounts were paid to the two artists who did the two projects? A I would consider that to be one of the

criteria in the determination of damages Q Okay Do you have any information or

documents showing what amounts were paid to the two artists who did the burnt church and the projection project on the Contemporary Art Museum? A Q A Q No I don t Those were different artists right okay

Two different artists Groups

I think I mentioned the name of the two Do you know the name of

that did the burnt church

the artist who did that other -A Q It s in that document Let s go ahead and mark this one so I can

understand exactly which project we re talking about here So just to back up a little bit about Rainer Kehres and Sabastian Hungerer the two that did the church project? A Q Yes Which is one of the projects you are we talked Those are

1

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

complaining about A Q A Q

And what is the other project?

Ann Lislegaard Crystal World? Yes So her project was a project on the

Contemporary Art Museum? A Q Yes Did your Media Box concept use two-channel

3D animation? A This is program talk in terms of different

ways of dealing with video and how you remix video It s not really hardware So the Media Box and the process involved the protocol dealt with digital artists who had adept And this is

skills in multiple programming languages just one particular kind of language Q Okay

Had you seen any of these materials

before The Light Project materials that we ve marked as Exhibit P? A Q A Q A Q Did I -Have you seen -The exhibits or did I see the actual -This pamphlet? I ve seen this pamphlet Okay You produced it

Then I m sure you did

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Count Q

Are there any other projects that you are complaining your concepts were misappropriated? A It s what you stated it s what s in the

So you were telling me how to measure the

damages and you said one way to determine your damages would be to look at the costs that Defendants paid to Ann Lislegaard for their works What other way how else are you measuring Rainer Kehres and Sebastian Hungerer

your damages for the improper use of your ideas? A One did not have a platform to further

develop the ideas Q A What do you mean by that? Meaning that all of these ideas are that they are formally a

sequential protocol design

research and development process and every time one is excluded from the study and development of ideas the

19 20 21 22 23 24 25

protocol is stymied and the quality of the work is always compromised Q Okay Do you as you sit here today have

any dollar amount of damages you believe you are entitled to for this Count II? A I think we ll be developing this as this

discovery goes forward

1

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 BY MS today?

Q

So you don t have an amount as you sit here

A

No (A short break was then taken)

LUBBEN Q I want to talk about your damages for a In your interrogatories I asked you to You listed $2 210 in legal fees

little bit

itemize your damages

paid to Doug Baron for his role in drafting and reviewing the Option Contract that category of damages? A Q Arts paid? A Q I paid Okay You also state that you are seeking Yes Are those fees that you paid or that Media Are you seeking those

$2 995 83 for costs associated with Logic Systems Sound and Lighting damages? Are you still seeking those Audio and video

Does that ring a bell? 2004?

package for December 31st A

But I just want to clarify that because

things can happen on damages Q A Sure Logic System s damages were paid by -- I m I may have

confused -- were paid by Media Arts

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

missed that Q A That s fine We re just here to clarify

Because I m not claiming Media Arts

damages because Media Arts is dissolved and that was just -- so I don t want to confuse the lawsuit or anybody on damages Q And as I sit here now --

I m going to hand you -MS LUBBEN Let s mark this Logic Systems

(Defendant Exhibit Q

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Invoice Q

was then marked for identification ) Okay Exhibit Q appears to be a Logic

Systems bill or invoice for $2 995 83 for Audio and Video Package for December 31st 2004 I was thinking

this is what expenses Media Arts incurred -A Q A And I -- and I --- for the Pulitzer wall projection? Sorry Yes Yes And they are And the

bill was paid the bill Q A Q

And I don t think Paul Guzzardo paid

I think Media Arts paid this bill Okay So you are not seeking --

So then I should not be seeking that Okay And then your interrogatory

responses list that you are seeking as damages $8 053 20 for fees paid to the Friedman Group for their services rendered in attempting to secure the

2

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

property in Grand Center Now it s my understanding that the Option Contract said you were responsible for any Friedman Group fees A Q A Q fees Are you still seeking the $8 000? Yes You are still seeking that? Yes And were any of those fees Friedman Group

paid by Media Arts? A Q No Some of the Friedman invoices are directed with Media Arts with that P O

to you Box?

Paul Guzzardo

A Q sent? A Q A Q

Yes

Yes

Is that just where the invoices would be

Yes And you paid those invoices? Correct Correct

And then your interrogatory responses say

that you are alleging damages in excess of $500 000 for Defendants alleged unauthorized and uncredited

use of your intellectual property including your designs and various projects projects we talked about Would that be the two

the burnt church and the

2

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

projections on the Contemporary Art Museum? A projects Q Okay What other projects are you claiming That would be them There may be other

that Defendants misappropriated your designs and ideas to which you are entitled damages? A Well there are the ongoing UMSL project Nine Group

and the Nine Design Project Q A Q A

Any other projects? I think that covers it What is the UMSL project? That s the radio station and office

building next to Channel 9 Q A opened Q What designs or ideas from Media Box do you The radio station office building? Being constructed And I believe it s

believe Defendants took or used from you and incorporated into the UMSL project? A media plaza Q What do you mean by that are you talking Well it s including the creation of a

about a physical media plaza associated with the building? A Yes

2

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

Q A

Any other designs or ideas? The conceptual ideas of various media

groups being concentrated in Grand Center using acoustical space and fashioning a public sphere were part of the ongoing discussion with Grand Center Q What other concept of the UMSL project do

you believe came from you? A Well I think those are the critical ones

the nature of the media plaza and the concentration of media groups as a way of creating a certain media synergy Q When you say concentration of media groups do you mean radio? it s all

what do you mean by "media groups" A It s radio

but it s websites

All media groups now move within multiple grammars and multiple digital languages Media Box And the nature of the was how

the nature of the media proposal

to create a core synergy of media within Grand Center Q Are you aware of the use or implementation

of a media plaza in any other projects anywhere else in the world? A map on it Oh yeah They vary And I don t keep a

Australia of course is one of the most

24 25

famous

And obviously Times Square is kind of the

defining paradigm

2

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 Project world?

Q

Are you aware of a concentration of media

groups being implemented -A Q Of course -- or being used anywhere else in the

A Q

Of course

They are developing programs

So what is it about these two concepts that

you believe makes you entitled to compensation for them being your unique designs or ideas? A Because of the nature of my contract my

propriety interest the players involved Q

the sequence of communications and

When you say contract are you referring to

the Option Contract? A Q Yes And let s talk about the Nine Group Design What is the Nine Group Design Project? A That was just I believe it s on the third

floor of the Channel 9 building creating new space for the Beacon Q A Q What s the Beacon? Beacon is a web-based news blog website What aspects of the Nine Group Design

Project came from your designs and ideas? A The Media Box project is rooted in certain

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

designs that were done for Secret Baker and they re a very comparable source of form projections light

systems that begin to suggest an element of Secret Baker Secret baker is the stage play Q A Okay Anything else? stage set

I think that is a fair description of that

particular project Q Would Sung Ho be able to view the Nine

Group Design Project and point out what is consistent with the Secret Baker project? A Q about? A I think we ve covered most of them You d have to ask Sung Ho Kim Any other projects that we haven t talked

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q

Okay

Are you seeking any damages for

your -- in your document production you produced some travel expenses for traveling to Australia Are you

seeking some of those costs as part of this lawsuit? A were listed Q Okay They are not listed here but maybe Are I listed those didn t I? I thought those

they are in a different interrogatory response you seeking those damages? A Yes And I have some Australia and

Rochester that were listed

2

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

Q

Okay

Because -- why do you think you are

entitled to payment for those costs? A Well those trips and those presentations

were part of this program to promote the Media Box around the world to bring in a series of

collaborators at Grand Center and to make Grand Center St Louis s media heritage to bring awareness to

other parties and other cities of the nature of Grand Center and its media heritage Q Did the Option Contract provide that you

would be reimbursed for costs expended in promoting the Media Box? A the breach Q So had the Defendants obtained the Day No not specifically but I did not intend

property and made -- and you d had the opportunity to exercise the option would you have at some point recovered those costs from Defendants? A Well the investment in those costs would

have been the basis for -- the trips were made so I could put together the Media Box to make it happen make it credible They were equal to any construction costs or any Eric Friedman bill and they were part of the demands in terms of what I needed to do as part of my

2

1 2 3 4 5

responsibility during this interim period for this option Q Okay And then you claim damage for missed And we ll go

commercial and business opportunities through those

Are there any other category of

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

damages that we haven t talked about? A Q It seems somewhat inclusive So let me just make sure I have it The

$7 400 for Friedman services or whatever -- actually $8 053 20 for Friedman attorney fees $2 210 for the Doug Baron

You want to be reimbursed for your correct?

travel expenses to Australia and Rochester A Q Correct

Are you seeking reimbursement for any of I did come a Paul

your own time or attorney s fees billed?

across something that looked to be something Guzzardo billing sheet something that you re -A Q perhaps? A Q Yes Okay That makes more sense

Do you know if this is

That s an Eric Friedman billing sheet Oh okay Eric s billing sheet for you

You are seeking lost profits had from not being able to fully develop the Media Box you are

2

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

seeking damages for misappropriation of your ideas and concepts A Q the four projects we talked about? Yes You are seeking damages for missed

commercial and business opportunities? A Q A Q Correct Are there amounts you can place? That s being developed Okay Are there any other categories of

damages that you are seeking that we haven t already talked about? A Q distress? A Q Whatever Okay as provided by the pleadings I think that generally covers it Are you seeking any damages for emotional

Are you seeking -- I don t think but are you seeking your

your petition references it attorney s fees A Q No if you know?

Come up with a theory quickly

Brainstorm on the break Okay You claim that you were removed from

the Board of Directors of the Humanities Instructional Television Educational Center? A Q Correct That s HITEC that we were talking about

2

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

before? A Q Correct And you mentioned before that no one

communicated to you why you were not nominated for the board correct? A Q A Q A Q Not in so many words Okay? Or I was nominated for the board You were nominated? I was nominated I was not elected

And no one conveyed to you the reasons for

you not being reelected? A effect Q What is your basis for thinking you were No I did not get a statement to that

not reelected as a result of something Defendants did? A after Issue of sequence The vote was a few days

maybe two to three days after the Post article Q So the timing of the election following

publication of Jake Wagman s article leads you to believe it must have been because of the article? A Q Correct Are there any other reasons you have to

support your belief that Defendants are the reason you were not reelected?

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

A

I would say the timing of it is clear

because there were no other reasons presented and I had been nominated Q Have you spoken with anyone associated with

HITEC about whether the article was a reason for you not being reelected? A The only communication was one of the

directors resigned immediately after I was not reelected and notified the then Attorney General Jay Nixon of certain events Q A Q A Who notified Attorney General Jay Nixon? Director Kathy Dunlop She s the one who resigned? Yes And she also met or notified the Louis Community College system that she was

Chancellor of the St Q resigning? A Q

Notified them of what

That she was resigning How far after?

yeah

20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q A

Within a few days Okay

week

two weeks

And I believe these issues were all

discussed with these various players Q Did you have any discussions with any of

these people?

2

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

A Q

No Are you aware of any other possible reasons

for your non-reelection? A Q No What about the prior lawsuit that you would that have had anything to

brought against HITEC do with it? A

That lawsuit created the board so they were

there on account of my lawsuit Q You claim that you were excluded from Louis Old Post Office Plaza

involvement in the St

Can you explain what you mean? A The Post Office Plaza incorporated a

certain model that I had developed with the City of St Louis for the corner of Tucker and Washington Q Is that the corner where Media Arts had

some activity? A Q A It would be the other side Okay So Media Arts was on the east side It wrapped the corner the

southeast side

And the Plaza

was on the southwest side Q Okay Did you have a contract or a written Louis in connection

agreement with the City of St

with this work that you did with them?

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 99

A Q A

Yes What s the date of this? The contract with SLDC would have been in

I believe Q So when do you believe you were excluded Louis Old Post Office

from a project involving the St Plaza? A

I had sustained an ongoing conversation with various parties in SLDC over a

with the city

period of years and I was also in conversation with

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

the Gateway Foundation which was one of the funders for the Post Office Plaza Q do some work A So in 1999 you had a contract with SLDC to When did that conclude? It was an Option Contract to begin

attempting to build and design this media platform at that site It was not built and the Option Contract

was terminated by the city The ideas in practice within that project were then to a large extent transported to the Post Office site Q A 2003 When was that Option Contract terminated? The Option Contract was terminated probably I may not have

but I thought I produced that Q Okay

So you are saying you had this

2

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

initial agreement with SLDC in 1999

their

relationship formally continued until the Option Contract was terminated by the city in 2003 Is it

your testimony that you continued to have some kind of working relationship with SLDC following 2003? A Well there was a continuing interest And

I involved members of SLDC Media Box

what was going on with the

showing this is a method and a way of

sustaining and continuing with these ideas uptown possibly to return downtown obviously Q Before the Jake Wagman article what was

your last contact you had with SLDC? A It would have been with Sonia Pelley who Community Information Network

was head of the CIN

and it probably would have been a few months beforehand Q And when did you have contact with Sonia

Pelley again after the article ran? A Q St I don t remember Okay I don t remember that

So you wanted to be included in the right?

Louis Old Post Office Plaza Project A

I was involved over a number of years with

a series of individuals who were working on a media plaza for downtown This goes back to 1996 It

involves Freeman Bosley

it involves Mayor Harmon and

2

1

it involves current Mayor Slay

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

In 2005 I began discussions with the Gateway Foundation regarding these ideas Box the Media

and alternative venues downtown for this type of

installation Q What did Defendants do that you think

caused you to be excluded from further work or projects such as the St A Again Louis Old Post Office Plaza?

communications severed after the

Wagman article Q A Would that be Sonia Pelley or someone else? The primary point person at that time was Christy Fox

the head of Gateway Foundation Q Okay

So you had been in talks with

Christy Fox about doing some projects for the Gateway Foundation or for groups associated with the Gateway Foundation? A Q Yes Yes that s probably better

And then after the article she stopped

communicating with you? A Q Largely yes did she ever tell you why

So Christy Fox

she stopped communicating with you? A Well we had communications after the

We had some meetings

2

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

Q A Q

Okay? And that ended Okay What is the basis for your belief

that it ended because of the Defendants? A Because again I m reading there s a

sequential series of events that everything closed up after the article Q No one told you that but you are assuming

that because of the timing? A Yes none of the individuals that I ve

mentioned their names came out and said that Q Okay And then you mentioned being Is that

excluded from the Gateway Mall Expansion

another project that you would have had working through Christy Fox? A That is a project that involved Christy Fox of

and it was also a project that involved the city course of St Q Louis

And then you also mentioned that you were Louis Community Media

denied association with the St

and Arts Organization in developing the Sam Clemens Remix Project? A That was KDHX And I had attempted to move

the Remix Project or proposed moving the Remix Project

25

to their media lab for further design and development

2

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 KDHX? Dever with?

Q A

Was it at Wash

U

before or where was it?

That was something I developed with and

through Gateway Media Literacy Partners and a national organization which was the National Association of Media Literacy Q Did anyone tell you that your being

precluded from being associated with the Sam Clemens Remix Project was because of something the Defendants did or because of the Jake Wagman article? A The head of KDHX and I had dinner and I And I

proposed that the project continue with KDHX

indicated that I knew this might be a problem because of the Wagman Wagman you know my reputation because of There had been comments

and other comments

made by one of the DJ s and other people just gossiped about it and he said we can get it done closed it off Q nothing happened and then

Who is the head of KDHX that you had dinner

A

I can t think of his name

Paul

Paul

Q A Q

How do you spell Dever? D-E-V-E-R Do you know if he s still associated with

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

A Q Paul Dever? A five years Q

I think so When was the last time you ve spoken with

I probably haven t spoken to him in four or

So do you believe Paul Dever would testify

that he excluded you from the Sam Clemens Remix Project because of the article? A Oh I m not saying Paul Dever excluded me

I didn t say that Q project? A Q A Paul Dever is a person Right or to KDHX? Paul Dever is where you wanted to move the

I had discussed that I wanted to move it to

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

KDHX for further R&D Q confused A The project opened at kind of an Louis in Where was the project before? I think I m

international conference that was held in St June of 2007 Q Okay

We talked about the Board of the St Louis Old Post Office

Directors of HITEC Plaza

the Gateway Mall Expansion and the Sam Clemens Are there any other missed

Remix Project

2

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

opportunities that you claim were caused by Defendants? A Well we also talked about Grand Center and

the other Grand Center events or projects Q The burnt church and the light production

on the Contemporary Art Museum? A Q Yes And my loss yes

And then we talked about the Nine Group and Are there any other opportunities

the UMSL project

that you claim you missed out on because of the Defendants? A Q I think that s fairly descriptive Okay You referenced in your discovery

responses making a complaint against Alan Pratzel What complaint did you make against Alan Pratzel? A Committee Q You personally made a complaint against That was a complaint with the Disciplinary

Alan Pratzel? A Q A Q A submitted? Yes When did you make that complaint? March of 2011 March of 2011 What was your complaint? Isn t the complaint

Didn t I submit it?

2

1 2 3 4 5 6

Q

I don t think I have it

In your original

discovery responses you said the complaint including the attached pleadings and accompanying exhibits would be available for inspection and copy at the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel Now of course they won t

release that information to me

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 about? A case you

I don t see that it s been produced in this but I can check again or maybe I can get it from

But as we sit here do you remember what the complaint was about? A Q Oh I remember

Can you tell me what the complaint was

The complaint was in my capacity as a

Missouri licensed counsel regarding certain action which took place in March -- I don t have it it was March 3rd or March 7th 2007 I think

regarding a loan And at that time

for the repair of the burnt church

Alan Pratzel was counsel for the Defendants Q A Q So you filed the complaint in March 2011? Yes And it relates back to -- I think Alan left

around 2007 Grand Center? A Yes

2

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

Q

So it relates back to something he did when

he was counsel for Grand Center? A Q Correct And what was your complaint with respect to

a loan involving repair of the burnt church? A That the motion for the loan was made by

Emily Pulitzer Q A Okay? And that Alan Pratzel had an obligation as

counsel of Grand Center and soon to be head of the Disciplinary Committee to make certain information known to the individuals on the Executive Committee who were going to vote on that loan Q And what was the information he should have

made available? A That given the attendant publicity caused

by my litigation and the nature of the loan and the prospective use of the church that the events would cause discredit to the judiciary of Missouri Q A Q Discredit to who? The judiciary of Missouri I m just confused What is the problem?

What was the problem with the loan? A The question comes down to whether or not a

director can move --

2

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

Q

She was a Director on the Board of Grand

Center and she moved that Grand Center take out a loan to fund repairs or construction or renovation of the burnt church? A Q A Correct And that was improper because? There are certain issues regarding director

self-dealing under various laws Q Did she have some -- how did the loan The loan was from a bank or from

connect to her?

another Grand Center entity? A Q A Q of those A Q Sure I don t think I ve seen those So the alleged improper activities happened back in 2007 A right? Right There are certain obligations we It was from an outside banking institution Did Emily have a connection with the bank? You know Okay the documents detail all that I ll just ask for another copy

Well

have as registered members of the bar to protect the judiciary from ill repute Q impropriety? When did you become aware of this alleged

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 emails

A Q

Through the first group of discovery Okay So you got into the discovery in

this case and you looked through it and you said Alan did something wrong here and now it s March of 2011 I m going to file a complaint against him? A Q A Q A Q Basically Did you talk to Alan before you did that? No When is the last time you talked to Alan? Back in the old negotiations days Okay What kinds of communications did you

ever have with Alan in connection with the Media Box? Did you ever talk to Alan about the Media Box concept or designs? A Oh you know he was copied on maybe 100

Q

Did you have any conversations either in

person or on the phone with Alan about Media Box designs? A There would have been crossover

21 22 23 24 25

conversations maybe twice during that period of time but very quick or something like that primarily through the records you have Q Okay Did you -- did you have any face to It was

face or on the phone conversations with Alan about the

2

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

Option Contract?

I know he s copied on the emails but did you have

that may or may not have gone to you

any phone calls or face to face conversations with him about the Option Contract? A Eric would have had most of that I think

there may have been one maybe where he came in when we were there Q That would have been brief okay

What was the outcome of the complaint that

you filed against Alan? A to forget It was submitted to -- and here I m going There is another board which I don t know

the name of it because I don t have the records with me a board of 13 people who the Disciplinary

Committee submitted it to for review Q them? A Q A Sure of course Okay And did you ever hear back from

And what did they report to you? They reviewed it and the exhibits which

came with it and they denied the complaint Q A a few months Okay When did you receive that denial?

The denial is dated -- I was traveling for The denial was waiting for me It

probably came in probably 11 days after the filing or something like that so that could have been later in

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

March or early April 2011 Q Did you ever provide a draft of the Option

Contract to Sung Ho Kim or Heather Woffer? A Q I m sure yeah I must have

Do you remember any specific input or

feedback they had on the Option Contract? A First of all I m not sure Heather Woffer

was in town at that time Q What about Sung Ho Kim do you remember him

having any comment or concern about any particular provision?

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A Q

No

he didn t

Did the Option Contract require Defendants

to find an alternative location for the Media Box if they weren t able to obtain the Day property? A Q It didn t speak to that issue Did something happen in 2010 to cause you

to decide to bring this lawsuit against the Defendants? A Q 2010? Okay The lawsuit was filed in 2009 I didn t realize it had been pending I know it sat for a while

for that long A Q Okay

So what happened in 2009?

What triggered

you to make the decision to bring this lawsuit?

2

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 things

A motivations

I would -- there would be multiple I would say if there was a provacative

moment it would have been the city light project Q And you are referring to the projections on

the Contemporary Art Museum? A Q And the church So you saw those in 2008 and you thought

about it and you were upset and you brought this lawsuit in 2009? A That was one of the factors among other

Q A

Okay Well

What are the other factors? everything I discussed earlier and my

inability to participate in any projects Q Okay In the first round of discovery I

asked you to identify people with knowledge or information about the claims You mentioned

communications with the Columbia University School of Journalism? A Yeah These are people interested in the

Media Box and in the Pulitzer loan Q When were your communications with the

Columbia University School of Journalism? A Q Oh Okay that would have been about a year ago What prompted -- who did you speak

2

1 2

with at Columbia University? A I didn t It was just one of the

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

architects -- the school is aware of this litigation and thought that this story needs to be told nationally Q A Q A Q A Q A I m sorry Yeah one of the architects?

at Barnhart Columbia

You had contact with this architect? Yes And what is that person s name? David Smiley Did you call him or did he call you? We call one another And he s attended

lectures of mine Q So you had a conversation with him hey

this lawsuit is going on media article? A

this might be an interesting

That it would make an interesting

investigative article Q know? A Well he had approached people in the Has he done anything with that do you

journalism school to try to find someone who d spend some time on the article Q Do you know if he found anyone --

2

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 in it

A Q A

There were so many awkward --- that would --- it kept the client from getting involved

Q

Okay

And what would be the subject of

their article? A Q The last eight hours Everything we talked about your problems

with the Media Box and Defendants? A Q And the Pulitzer loan And the Pulitzer loan okay And when you

say Pulitzer loan you are referring to some loan that Emily Pulitzer moved for in connection with getting funds in relation to the burnt church? A Q Correct You say there have been communications with When did you speak to the New

the New York Times York Times? A

There were some emails between myself and

Doreen Carvajal Q A What was the substance of the emails? I think I provided her with some links and

a copy of the OCDC complaint Q Do you have a personal vendetta against

Alan Pratzel or you were just upset when you saw what

2

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

you thought were improper -A My concern was -- the relationship between

the media and the broader historical implications that certain things are going on Q But are you saying there is some connection

between this improper loan and the Media Box concept or ideas? missing it A deal with St Most of my work and most of my lectures Louis being a font for media theory What is the connection? I think I m

And there s a series of events which have prevented this kind of landmark heritage site from being further developed Box And these events that surround the Media

this loan demonstrated some profound problems in

the public s sphere beyond the simple matters of my contract and there are people that are interested in it Q And you are referring to the burnt church

as the landmark historic site? A Q A No What are you referring to? I m referring to Marshall McLuhan and the media college

discourse of media theory Q

When is the last time you ve had

communication with Doreen Carvajal from the New York

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Times? A of emails Q Architectural Record who have you Shortly after there may have been a couple

communicated with? A Columbia Q A Institute And The Huffington Post? Someone a Director of Buckminster Fuller That was actually Columbia That was

he attended some lectures and contacted I forget the name

someone at The Huffington Post Q A Q A Was this in 2011? 2011

Was it for the same purpose? Exploring the board issues of our nations

media heritage

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q

Okay

Do you recall the last time you had

any contact with Emily Pulitzer? A Q A No the meetings we discussed

The September 2004 meeting perhaps? Yes and possibly -- I spent time at the

Pulitzer Foundation obviously in September 2004 to install the project Q Right I asked you in your discovery You said

responses about the architectural concepts

2

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 architectural concepts were discussed and presented in a series of presentations at Washington University in December of 2003 A well is that correct?

There was one presentation at Washington -I presented it as part of a Sung

with Sung Ho

Ho studio and I think he had ongoing presentations about it to students Q Okay plural

And then there s a reference to St

Louis University in July of 2004 through September? A There were a series of meetings set up by Provost Weixelman at St Louis

Dean Weixelman

University with various department heads regarding the Media Box Q And were you just trying to get more

support from members of the SLU community for the Media Box? A Yes And there were -- SLU had there were of the

directors from SLU that are on the boards here Defendants boards meetings Q Okay

and they were in attendance at the

Were any of the people attending the U were

SLU meetings or the presentation at Wash

they asked to sign any agreement keeping whatever information you shared with them confidential? A No No

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Q

You said architectural concepts were

discussed and presented at Southern Illinois Carbondale on October 13th A Q professors? A Students and there were some professors Yes Did you present that to students there or 2003?

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Q

And then you presented the architectural

concepts in connection with a visit to Southern Illinois University Edwardsville in October of 2005 is that correct? A Q Correct And then I think you mentioned before the

Media Ecology Association of Rochester in June of 2004 you presented the media concepts there A Q Correct And University of Queensland we talked correct?

about that a little bit? A Q Yes And in addition you also have see a list of

plaintiff s multimedia presentations (Defendant Exhibit R Guzzardo Lectures

was then marked for identification ) (Brief discussion held off the record) Q Okay

2

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 list? BY MS

A

I was there at all of them

That s fine

LUBBEN Q So R is a list of -- did you prepare this

A Q and papers? A Q

Yeah

I prepared the list

And this is a list of your presentations

Presentation and papers

yes

Would concepts from the Media Box or

architectural designs we ve talked about regarding Media Box have been discussed at each of these? A Aspects Yes aspects would be done

These lectures are largely about protocol development and design for cities and they include various aspects of my practice images Some would include some of these

Some would reference some of the ideas and

not include the images Q And you are referring to the Media Box

images or ideas? A Q A Yes Okay I should add for this and I will add the

last one is the year 2010 and there are subsequent presentations Q Okay You mentioned something about being

2

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

removed from the Board of the St Competition? A Q A Q Oh yes

Louis Follies

We haven t talked about that No No

have we?

Did anyone tell you that you were being

removed because of the Jake Wagman article? A know A Q B No one would have said that in that C Okay Who from the St Louis Follies can you

testify about the reasons for your removal from the board? A Q St That would be Jasmin Aber When were you removed from the Board of the do you know the date

Louis Follies Competition

roughly? A It would have been in 2006 It would have

been in the fall of 2006 Q Did you suffer any emotional distress as a actions?

result of Defendants A Q Yes

Tell me about the emotional distress that

you claim you ve suffered A I have put together protocol for the

reception of information in the public space

2

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

Protocol development and design began in the mid nineties And for a several year period of time I

aggressively researched and developed that protocol The further development and design of that protocol has been stymied as a result of the Defendants actions As I travel the world and tour and lecture in multiple venues in multiple locations more and more individuals feel that my protocol development has been one of a kind and is culturally and historically significant The actions of the Defendants have had significant impact on the further development and interrogation of this protocol I m getting older Q And time is short

And that saddens me

What have you done to try to implement your

protocol elsewhere? A Oh I tried again and again Just by way I

of one demonstration -- we d be here for 42 hours

was in Belfast in March was one of the primary kind of designer for the Elster Festival my third trip to

22 23 24 25

Belfast sponsored by Northern Ireland s primary architectural urban foundation place and I did a weeks workshop with programmers and designers and

architects focusing on aspects of the protocol

2

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

This particular workshop was focusing on the Facebook new programming strategies for social web and was able to do a fair amount in a one week period of time These episodic investigations workshops One

are not sufficient for effective protocol design requires a sustained program based in a lab that builds sequentially on itself

In the last five to six years I have been forced to act in a much more sporadic one-to-one basis and that has delayed and affected the protocol development Q Why do you think you haven t been able to

find another location for a sustained program? A These are very difficult issues They are

very difficult issues in terms of a place and funding and talent deposition Q A questions? Q Where have you looked into implementing -I m not your student? No I know So can you ask more specific I don t want to lecture This is a

what other cities or locations have you looked into implementing your Media Box concept that didn t ultimately work in St Louis?

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

A

Well

I hold a position as professor at did projects over done a few things I

University of Dundee in Scotland there tried to work over there

have done things at Pratt in New York City So there has been a steady attempt to find and land in one place where this can be dealt with on a day to week to month to year basis extremely difficult to do Q Okay You mentioned -- I was asking you And that is

about emotional distress and you mentioned that it saddens you Defendants When did you first feel sad about how actions have affected you?

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

A

There s a first

The recognition that it

would be extremely difficult to sustain protocol development and there were a series of episodes many of which you ve asked about which have demonstrated that again and again Q Okay Would you say the last episode was

viewing the two artworks and The Light Project in 2008? A No I think maybe my comments are getting

fuzzy and we re both getting fuzzy so I m not able to ask or answer Q Okay Has any emotional distress that you actions prevented you

have as a result of Defendants

2

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

from working? A Well I think I ve discussed that

throughout this deposition that there are a series of projects throughout St lawsuit was filed Louis and the reason this

that I would be participating in

and this protocol development would be aggressively refined and developed and it has not happened Q Okay Have you consulted with any medical

professional regarding any emotional distress from Defendants A Q actions? No Okay MS questions I have MR PAPA Very good You ve got the right LUBBEN I think that s all the

to read and sign off on it or you can waive that right We ll waive? THE WITNESS MR please PAPA We ll waive

I d prefer four on the page

No exhibits THE WITNESS MR PAPA Yeah I d like a disc we ll take a couple of

discs too MS LUBBEN I ll take a mini and an ASCII

DEPOSITION CONCLUDES AT 4 15 P M

2

1 2 3 I NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER Susannah L Walmsley RPR MO CCR and Notary

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

Public within and for the State of Missouri

do hereby

certify that the witness whose testimony appears in the foregoing deposition was duly sworn by me that

the testimony of said witness was taken by me to the best of my ability and thereafter reduced to typewriting under my direction counsel for related to that I am neither

nor employed by any of the

parties to the action in which this deposition was taken and further that I am not a relative or

employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties thereto nor financially or otherwise

interested in the outcome of the action

____________________________ Notary Public within and for The State of Missouri MO CCR #902

2

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

COURT MEMO IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST STATE OF MISSOURI PAUL GUZZARDO vs GRAND CENTER INC ) ) Case No ) 0922-CC01036

LOUIS

et al

CERTIFICATE OF OFFICER AND STATEMENT OF DEPOSITION CHARGE (Rule 57 03(g)(2)(a) & Sec 492 590 RSMO 1985 ) DEPOSITION OF PAUL GUZZARDO JUNE 27 2012 Name and address of person or firm having custody of the original transcript Cicely I Lubben STINSON MORRISON & HECKER LLP 7700 Forsyth Boulevard Suite 1100 St Louis Missouri 63105 TAXED IN FAVOR OF TOTAL TAXED IN FAVOR OF TOTAL CICELY I $ JOHN T $ PAPA LUBBEN

Upon delivery of transcript been paid

the above charges had not ye

It is required that all charges will be paid

in the normal course of business

MIDWEST LITIGATION SERVICES 711 N St Louis 11th Street Missouri 63101

__________________________ NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful