In his daily wrap up after a day in court, Paul Lawrence, lead attorney for the city, brought a surprise guest with him -- Seattle Deputy Mayor Tim Ceis.

Both addressed reporters in the interview room set up at the U.S. Federal Courthouse in Seattle. Ceis said he was pleased with how the case was going and looked forward to a good conclusion. I posted the first part of the two's interview down below, but you can listen to the full conversation here, here, and here.

Also, if you're interested in viewing an exhibit from the case, click here, to view an email from Wally Walker about the private investment group's plan to keep the team in Seattle.

Tim Ceis: From the city’s perspective we’re very pleased with how the case is going. We were hoping we would wrap up the testimony today. But we didn’t so we’ll have to come back on Thursday. So we’ll be here to wrap up things on Thursday and hear closing arguments. But we’re very, very pleased with how the case is going, and we’re looking forward to a good conclusion.

[More:]

Q: Do you agree with Sen. Gorton’s assessment that failing to win a KeyArena renovation undercuts your specific performance argument?

Paul Lawrence: No. Absolutely not. Our position is that the specific performance case is decided based on the terms of the contract, that the Seattle Sonics are a unique tenant, and that they bring benefits to the city over and beyond the rent that are hard to measure. That’s the specific performance case and it has nothing to do with what Sen. Gorton said.

Q: Do you know what Sen. Gorton based that assessment on in his emal?

Lawrence: You’ll have to ask Sen. Gorton.

Q: Does the city have unclean hands in bringing this lawsuit to try and enforce specific performance?

Lawrence: Absolutely not. I think what you saw in the testimony today was testimony from Wally Walker, who was a member of the ’79 championship team and a longtime Seattle resident who is active in the community and with the basketball team. He as a citizen wanted to keep the Sonics here and worked toward that effort.

There was a lot of argument by the council trying to put two and three together to make four. But it doesn’t add up because there’s simply no evidence of any sort of plan as you look at it. I think if you look at that they pointed to so often, you’ll see that it does not involve the city. It anticipates the city being a participant later on in an effort to keep the Sonics in Seattle, but there’s nothing to suggest that plan involved the city.

Of course, this all happened after Clay Bennett announced very clearly his plans to leave Seattle for Oklahoma City.

Q: But didn’t it happen after the city hired Slade Gorton as its attorney?

Lawrence: No. It didn’t happen. As it came up today in the testimony, it dates back to July 2006 (2007 actually, I believe) which was before K&L Gates was approached.

Sen. Gorton prior to being retained by the city, was independently working to find a solution. And as you heard today, the plan he was working on originally was a Bellevue arena, which was not in the interest of the City of Seattle as a solution for the Sonics.

Q: If you were giving advice to them, would you advise them not to use the poison well quote on the cover of their PowerPoint?

Lawrence: I would think that if it was Mr. McGavick who wrote that he would have to address that to his own attorneys. Again, the city had nothing to do with that, so it’s not our place to say what he should or shouldn’t have said.

Q: When was it that Sen. Gorton was retained by the city?

Lawrence: K&L Gates was first retained I believe the day after the arbitration was filed (around Sept. 21).

Q: What is Gates history with the City of Seattle as far as representing them?

Ceis: We don’t have an ongoing retainer with them on litigation issues. The act for us on various capacities on counsels, and in some cases on legal matters. But it’s on a case by case basis.

Q: You said K&L Gates was retained shortly after the arbitration was filed. In that meeting at Mr. Walker’s house that involved Mr. Ballmer and Mr. Gorton was in October. So who was Gorton representing when he was at Mr. Walker’s house talking about the PowerPoint presentation?

Lawrence: Mr. Gorton represented himself. When we were retained, we indicated to the city that prior to that date Sen. Gorton and Gerry Johnson had been working to find a perspective ownership and alternative solutions to losing the team. It was reflected in the retention of K&L Gates that there was this work that was being done Sen. Gorton and Gerry Johnson that was ongoing at the time we were retained for litigation.