NRA Files Petition Demanding Representation at NY AG's Deposition of Oliver North
The action is in response to a subpoena from the New York Attorney General’s Office sent to Oliver North, seeking the deposition and documents related to his time leading the gun lobby group.
August 16, 2019 at 01:48 PM
5 minute read
The National Rifle Association filed a petition against New York Attorney General Letitia James on Friday, demanding that their attorneys be present during a scheduled deposition of former NRA president Oliver North by attorneys from James’ office next week.
Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Melissa Crane rejected a temporary restraining order against the deposition during a hearing Friday, but scheduled another round of arguments for Monday morning.
The action is in response to a subpoena from the New York Attorney General’s Office sent to North, seeking the deposition and documents related to his time leading the gun-rights advocacy group.
That subpoena, according to court filings, is part of New York’s investigation, launched in April, into the NRA’s finances. That investigation is ongoing and has not, as of yet, produced any litigation or enforcement actions from the state.
New York Attorney General Letitia James, in a statement, criticized the NRA for attempting to intervene in her office’s deposition of North.
“The NRA’s scare tactics simply won’t work here. Our investigation is proceeding with the same focus and fairness we apply to any case,” James said. “Whether its deposing NRA leaders or fact finding through other investigative tools, we will ensure that justice is served because no one is above the law.”
The NRA is represented by attorneys from Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors, which has offices in New York and Dallas. William Brewer III, a founding partner of the firm, said they’re seeking to prevent North from disclosing any information that may be considered privileged.
”Naturally, the NRA seeks to prevent the disclosure of any confidential or privileged information,” Brewer said. “As the former president of the NRA, Lt. Col. North has been privy to attorney-client privileged information, which must be protected in the interest of the Association and its members. As such, we seek the court’s assistance in allowing us to be present during the interview of Lt. Col. North.”
The new conflict was set off late last week, when attorneys for the NRA asked that they be allowed to review any documents North was planning to share with the New York Attorney General’s Office. The NRA also asked that one of its attorneys be allowed to sit in on his deposition.
That’s because, as the NRA argued, the information and documents North may be planning to provide to the New York Attorney General’s Office may be privileged and, consequently, unavailable to be disclosed to James and her attorneys.
“By virtue of his positions as President and Board member at the NRA, North was afforded access to and learned of information, communications, and documents that are protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work product doctrine, and as trial preparation materials,” the petition filed Friday said. “He, however, is not the holder of the privileges.”
After making the request, attorneys for the NRA were sent nearly 900 pages of documents that North planned to provide to the New York Attorney General’s Office, according to court papers.
Attorneys for the group reviewed each document to see if they needed to make additional redactions, or if any should be withheld from the New York Attorney General’s Office on grounds of privilege. The review ended with several new redactions, and other concerns quickly arose for the gun lobby group.
“For example, the review identified a document that is wholly privileged on attorney-client privilege and work product grounds and needed to be withheld from the production in its entirety,” the NRA said.
Fearing a similar situation during North’s deposition, an attorney for the NRA wrote to the New York Attorney General’s Office on Thursday and asked to be present during the testimony.
The New York Attorney General’s Office wrote back late Thursday and said they would not allow attorneys for the NRA to be present for North’s deposition, which prompted the action filed Friday.
“The NRA will be severely prejudiced if it is not permitted to attend North’s examination in order to object to the disclosure of the NRA’s protected information by North,” court papers filed by the gun-rights group said. “Given that the NRA’s further review of North’s production to the NYAG yielded additional claims of privilege, the NRA has real concerns that, absent the presence of NRA’s counsel, North may divulge protected information during his testimony.”
The NRA isn’t seeking to quash the subpoena from James altogether, they’re asking for it to be modified so their attorneys can be present for North’s testimony. Given that the deposition is scheduled for Tuesday, attorneys for the group asked for expedited review of its claims.
North, who is represented by Brendan Sullivan from Williams & Connolly, is not on the petition, according to documents.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRetired Judge Susan Cacace Elected Westchester DA in Win for Democrats
In Eric Adams Case and Other Corruption Matters, Prosecutors Seem Bent on Pushing Boundaries of Their Already Awesome Power
5 minute readEric Adams Trial Set for April as Defense Urges Dismissal of Bribery Count
Major Drug Companies Agree to Pay $49.1 Million to 50 States, Territories
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250