Federal Trade Commission v. Adept Management, Inc. et al

Filing 297

Opinion and Order. The information sought by the FTC is relevant and is not subject to attorney-client privilege. Pl. FTC's Resp. Mot. Compel, 2-3 (#293). Therefore, Mr. Lennon is ordered to answer the FTC's question, "who was the beneficiary of Revista?[,]" under oath, in writing within 14 days of the date of this order. Please access entire text by document number hyperlink. Signed on 07/03/2018 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (rsm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
MEDFORD DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Civ. No. 1: l 6-cv-00720-CL

Plaintiff

OPINION AND ORDER
V.

ADEPT MANAGEMENT INC., et al,
Defendants.

CLARKE. Magistrate Judge.
This case comes before the Court on Plaintiff FTC's Response (#293) to the motion to
compel (#291) filed by Defendants Dennis Simpson and Reality Kats, LLC ("Simpson
Defenda11ts"). Simpson Defendants' motion seeks to compel the resumption of depositions of
third-party witness David Lennon and Defendant Jeffrey Hoyal, and for an order compelling
them to answer questions for which they previously invoked privileges. In its response, the FTC
does not oppose the Simpson Ddendants' motion, but instead seeks to compel Mr. Lennon to
answer one specific question: '·\\'ho was the beneficiary of Revista?"
In response to that question, Mr. Len11on refused to answer, citing Oregon Rule o I
Professional Conduct 1.6. Lennon Dep. 126:16 - 127:22 (#292-2). Mr. Lennon conceded that

he did not believe the information to be subject to attorney-client privilege, but nonetheless
refused to answer based on a duty of confidentiality. Id. at 130:24 - 131 :6. Under Oregon Rule
of Professional Conduct 1.6\a), '·[a] lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the
representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is implied!:
authorized in order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph
(b )."'

Paragraph (b) then provides, "[a] lawyer may reveal information relating to the

reprcst:ntation of a client to the extent the lm\yer reasonably believes necessary: ... (5) to
comply with other law, court order, or as permitted by these Rules[.]"
The information sought by the FTC is relevant and is not subject to attorney-client
privilege.

Pl. FTC's Resp. Mot. Compel, 2-3 (#293).

Therefore, Mr. Lennon is ordered to

answer the FTC's question, "who was the beneficiary of Revista?[,]" under oath, in writing.
\\-ithin 14 days of the date of this order.

It is so ORDERED and DAT.
,,...
-~

United States Magistrate Judge