Nevada Supremes Cite Overuse of Fifth, But Not Deposition Flatulence, in Ruling Against Joe Francis
The Nevada Supreme Court didn’t reach the flatulence issue when it ruled against “Girls Gone Wild” founder Joe Francis earlier this month.
But the court did find a trial judge was justified in granting summary judgment to the Wynn Las Vegas casino in its civil suit to recover a $2 million gambling debt after Francis invoked the Fifth Amendment to nearly every question in a 2009 deposition, report the Associated Press and Courthouse News Service. (A criminal prosecution was pending at the time; Francis was later acquitted.)
Wynn’s lawyers had claimed Francis overused his privilege against self-incrimination during the February 2009 deposition, the Las Vegas Sun noted in a story published that year. The lawyers also alleged Francis showed his contempt in another way—through “repeated attempts to disrupt the deposition with flatulence.”
The Nevada Supreme Court opinion, issued on Oct. 6, said a judge was justified in refusing to allow Francis to reopen discovery and to cure his deposition after he failed to promptly withdraw the privilege. The decision gave this example of questions by a Wynn lawyer and answers by Francis:
Q: Are there any witnesses that have knowledge about your claimed pain, suffering, and emotional distress?
A: Right to remain silent.
Q: Are you married?
A: Right to remain silent.
Q: Does anyone live in your home with you?
A: Right to remain silent.
Q. Do you have a father?
A. I think everyone has a father. Yes.
Q. Okay. Is he living?
A. Right to remain silent.
Q. What’s his name?
A. Right to remain silent.
Q. Do you have a mother?
A. Yes. I believe everyone does.
Q. What’s her name?
A. Right to remain silent.
Francis’ lawyer, David Houston, told AP his client believed he had to invoke his Fifth Amendment rights across the board, likely because of a miscommunication.
Hat tip to Legal Ethics Forum and the Lawyerist.
