5

6

7

8

9

Yes.

Q. Again, on that 407 referral, that was

actually given to you when?

1. We made the decision in the office of

Enforcement to seek that authority in September

of '86.

19

20

21

When were you actually granted it?

December.

Now, did you find any information in

the statement of concern when you reviewed it

that you found to be incorrect?

MR. MCALEER:

Objection.

THE WITNESS: I don't recall making any

conclusions about inaccuracies.

Q. (BY MR. GALLAGHER) All right. As you

sit here today, do you know whether or not there
were in fact inaccuracies in that statement?

Number two, we are talking about, I think, a

STICKLEY & SCHUTZMAN, INC.

A.

19

little different.

20

21

A.

It was not a typical document, so there

wasn't really any norm.

2. Can you think of any other documents
that you have seen in your enforcement history
that don't tell the reader who the author is?
A. It's very common for us to get draft
exam reports, you know, one chunk of a report or

one set of comments.

Q. Is that what you understood this to be?

No, this was not that. This was a
Although it contained findings

from the examination report, it was not presented
in the same format that an exam report would have

23

24

Q. I think you said you got two or three drafts before the final, to your memory?

STICKLEY & SCHUTZMAN, INC.

8

9

Q.

Was there a cover letter?

A. Not on any that I saw, no. I was getting them secondhand through Steve

Hershkowitz.

Q. Were there any instructions that
accompanied that statement of concern
that you

A. По.

Q. and again, na'an, your understanding of its purpose was what?

A. It was a preliminary draft of the problems that the district was finding with

Lincoln Savings.

10

11

are aware of?

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Q. One of the things that you are concerned about from a confidentiality standpoint

is protecting the interests of the federal

insurer, correct?

I don't believe I have ever looked at

it that way.

Q. Who are the confidentiality

requirements intended to protect in your view?

STICKLEY & SCHUTZMAN, INC.

regulations, nor to my knowledge did she have a

role in putting then together.

THE WITNESS: I believe they are designed to protect the agency itself, its exan, its confidentiality exam procedures; certainly second, the associations involved, and the individuals, either within or outside the

institution, whose names are going to appear in exan reports or subpoenas, or whatever else might be involved.

Q. (BY MR. GALLAGHER) Do you know when

505 was enacted?

20

21

22

23

Q. And you operated under it for a long

time, right?

Yes.

Q. What did you do with the statement of concerns, which you understood to be the final draft of it? What did you then do with it?

A. Read it.

24

Q.

Okay.

25

A. Kept it in anticipation that the exan

& SCHUTZMAN

1

2

3

DEPOSITION OF ROSEMARY STEWART VOL. I

147

report was going to be bigger and better.
Q. And again, that's

When did you receive it? Did you tell

I'm sorry.

A. I believe the first draft in October;

final draft, December '86.

Q. Did you do anything, between the time you received the final draft in December and the end of the year, other than read it?

A. No.

Q. Did you do anything else on Lincoln

from the time you received the final draft to the

end of the year?

A. There was one area that my office

looked into involving an allegation that someone on the Board of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco had leaked information about Lincoln. That was one of the topics that we put in our request for investigative authority, we wanted

to, that we described as needing the

investigative authority to pursue.

Q. Back in September?

A. Yes. That is in the meno of

recommendation.

STICKLEY & SCHUTZMAN, INC.