On July 26, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted in part and denied in part a discovery-related
order in a case brought by the CFPB against a large credit reporting company and its executive for allegedly violating the terms of a 2017 consent order. The CFPB’s motion asked the court “to bar [the executive] from claiming or relying on an advice-of-counsel defense as a penalty for violating the court’s December 26, 2023 discovery order.” The CFPB’s motion was prompted by the executive’s alleged failure to produce certain documents and interrogatory responses following a discovery order, based on a claim of privilege. While the court declined to permanently bar the executive from asserting an advice of counsel defense, it concluded that the executive “may not assert the [attorney-client] privilege to avoid producing evidence related to his advice-of-counsel defense insofar as he intends to assert such a defense.” The court made clear that the executive must supplement his answers to certain interrogatories if he intends to rely on the advice of counsel defense.
