Anchorage Daily News

WASHINGTON -- During the trial of former Sen. Ted Stevens, one of the favorite recess activities among visiting attorneys and reporters was guessing how much he was paying his deep bench of ace lawyers, with the range generally falling between $2 million and $10 million.

Stevens has provided a limited answer, and it turns out the guesses weren't far off.

As of Jan. 3, he said in his final disclosure filing to the Senate, he owed between $1 million and $5 million to Williams & Connolly LLP, the law firm that defended him against felony charges that he failed to report gifts and services.

His actual expenses could be much higher. Stevens might have already paid some of his bill, and he was under no obligation to disclose the total fees -- only his debts. Stevens has refused to talk about the cost of his legal defense.

Rep. Don Young, also under investigation, has reported spending more than $2 million for legal work, and he has not been charged with a crime. In October, a jury found Stevens guilty of seven counts of lying on financial disclosure forms about gifts, including renovations that doubled the size of his home in Girdwood. But in April, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan dismissed the jury's guilty finding and threw out the indictment as a sanction for the Justice Department's failure to turn over evidence to Stevens that might have been favorable to him.

The disclosure forms don't ask for an exact amount, merely a range. Stevens checked off the $1 million to $5 million box on the line for his debt to Williams & Connolly. He said he wasn't paying interest on the debt.

Stevens had one of the leading criminal defense attorneys in the nation, Brendan Sullivan, heading up a team of at least a dozen lawyers, many of them working nights and weekends on Stevens' behalf.

Lawyers say that daily trial preparation in a hard-fought case is ordeal enough, but this one was especially so. In an effort to conclude the trial before the November election, motions packed with legal research were often filed late at night or on Saturdays and Sundays, with responses due from the opposing side only hours later.

During the trial, there were always at least four attorneys at the table with Stevens, and often a full row of more junior Williams & Connolly lawyers in dark gray suits sitting directly behind the defense table. The day his case was dismissed, 13 Williams & Connolly lawyers attended the proceedings.

BALLPARK COSTS

Paul Rothstein, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center and an expert in legal ethics, said a $5 million legal bill would be "in the ballpark for a top-flight Washington defense in a high-profile case from a top Washington law firm."

"What Stevens got for it were teams of lawyers combing with great care though probably thousands of documents," Rothstein said. "They got the tactical and persuasive wisdom of one of the country's best lawyers, Brendan Sullivan, a specialist in this kind of case. And not only him, but a group of lawyers at that firm who all put their heads together."

Even though Williams & Connolly had a firm-wide policy never to speak to reporters, Rothstein said that Stevens got a legal team highly attuned "to the machinery of publicity and politics" that included in its trial strategy his needs as a sitting senator running for office.

It's likely that Stevens won't have to pay his full bill -- the law firm got such great publicity defending him and winning a full dismissal that it will probably give Stevens a discount, Rothstein said.

"It is very true that there is inestimable worth to a large law firm to have such a high-profile case in terms of publicity and advertising," Rothstein said. "It's not easy for lawyers to advertise or get publicity. It's an educated guess that they do not expect to be fully paid."

Stevens would be well-advised to check his bill even if he directed Williams & Connolly to prepare a "bet-the-farm" defense, said Judith Bronsther, a New York attorney who works at Accountability Services Inc., a firm that provides experts on legal fees to litigants.

"That is a huge fee," she said, but not unheard of in complex litigation. But even in those cases, attorneys are obligated by professional ethics to restrain their fees and to not overstaff a case with expensive help all earning an hourly rate.

Stevens in September set up a legal expense fund with the Senate but never filed any disclosures about money paid to it. Since he no longer is a senator, the Senate Ethics Committee no longer requires him to submit such information.

Stevens also disclosed he owes $50,000 to $100,000 to another Washington law firm, Utrecht & Phillips. A partner in that firm, lobbyist Bill Phillips, is a former Stevens aide who attended many days of the trial and sat in the spectator section of the courtroom usually filled by Stevens' family and supporters.

STEVENS' FINAL FILING

The information about what Stevens owes in legal bills was revealed in the same disclosure paperwork that was at the heart of the corruption case against Stevens. It was the final personal financial disclosure required of Stevens, who just days after his conviction lost his re-election bid to Democrat Mark Begich. It covers all of 2008 plus the first three days of 2009.

In his final filing, Stevens said for the first time that he might have a liability to the oil-field service company Veco or its former chief executive Bill Allen over renovations and repairs to his home in Girdwood -- the issue at the heart of his trial. But Stevens didn't list an amount or even give a straightforward acknowledgment that he indeed owed money to Allen or Veco, only that a debt was alleged by the Justice Department.

"I am not in a position at this time to know what, if any, money I owe on account of work performed at my Girdwood home," Stevens wrote in an attachment to his report.

He suggested that anyone seeking more information would find it in the official record of his trial.

Prosecutors said he received $250,000 in free services and materials, though that total was hotly disputed by the defense and was eventually reduced by the judge. In an interview with prosecutors in April 2008, before Stevens was indicted, Allen thought the value of Veco's services to Stevens was about $80,000 -- still plenty over the $260 to $305 threshold for reporting, depending on the year.

Stevens also reported he and his wife shared a problem with many other Americans going into the recession and facing unemployment -- a large credit card debt. Catherine Stevens' Wells Fargo Visa card had a balance between $15,000 and $50,000 at the time of the filing. The interest rate was 11.9 percent.

Erika Bolstad reported from D.C. and Richard Mauer reported from Anchorage.

ADVERTISEMENT