Williams & Connolly Subpoenaed in Lance Armstrong Fraud Case
By Zoe Tillman, From Legal Times
Williams & Connolly is refusing to turn over documents about the firm’s relationship with Lance Armstrong as the disgraced cyclist fights allegations that he defrauded the U.S. government by lying about his use of performance-enhancing drugs.
One of Armstrong’s former teammates, Floyd Landis, who brought the fraud claims against Armstrong, filed papers late Tuesday asking a federal district judge in Washington to force the Washington-based law firm to produce the documents. He argues that Williams & Connolly can’t claim the records are protected by attorney-client privilege because the firm was part of Armstrong’s scheme to lie about his use of banned substances.
Williams & Connolly and Armstrong oppose the request, according to Landis’ lawyers at the Law Offices of Paul D. Scott in San Francisco. Williams & Connolly partner Mark Levinstein, who has represented Armstrong and was listed as the recipient of Landis’ subpoena, did not immediately return requests for comment on Wednesday morning. Armstrong is represented in the fraud case by Keker & Van Nest.
Landis served Williams & Connolly with the subpoena for documents in early May, according to his court papers. He asked for records of the firm’s communications with Armstrong and Capital Sports & Entertainment Holdings Inc., or CSE, which served as Armstrong’s agent and business manager and did other work for the U.S. Postal Service cycling team that Armstrong rode for.
Related:
Armstrong Fights Ex-Teammate Over Documents in Fraud Case
Lance Armstrong, Prosecutors Feud Over Evidence in Fraud Suit
Fraud Claims Against Lance Armstrong to Proceed
Landis claims that Armstrong’s lawyers at Williams & Connolly perpetuated lies about Armstrong’s use of performance-enhancing drugs, including making false statements to the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency and challenging doping allegations in arbitration and in court proceedings. The firm’s involvement triggered the crime-fraud exception to attorney-client privilege, Landis’ lawyers argued.
They also said that although Capital Sports acted as an agent for Armstrong, Williams & Connolly couldn’t claim attorney-client privilege over its communications with Capital Sports because it was not a client.
“Clearly, if the CSE defendants knew of Armstrong‟s doping then they were part of the deception and their claims of common interest or attorney-client privilege as to their communications with W&C would fail under the crime-fraud exception just as Armstrong‟s do,” Landis’ lawyers argued. “If on the other hand, we were to accept for purposes of this motion that the CSE defendants didn‟t know the truth, then the CSE defendants were mere pawns in Armstrong‟s efforts to use W&C to further his ongoing fraudulent scheme and they were not truly being used for the purpose of facilitating candid communications between a client and his lawyer.”
The U.S. Department of Justice did not sign onto Landis’ request, but Landis’ lawyers told the court that the government does not oppose it. Landis, who has admitted doping while he was a member of the Postal Service team, brought the False Claims Act case against Armstrong in 2010. The federal government in 2013 announced it was joining the case.
Certain sections of Landis’ request are redacted. At least some of those sections appeared to relate to exhibits that were not made available to the public.
Armstrong has repeatedly fought with DOJ and Landis over what documents each of the parties must turn over in the case. Last month, Armstrong filed papers with the court that accused Landis of refusing to produce documents about his “own false denials of doping during his cycling career.”
IMAGE: Lance Armstrong finishing 3rd in Sète, taking over the Yellow Jersey at the 2002 Grand Prix Midi Libre. May 25, 2002. Credit: Wikimedia Commons
For more on this story and Read Floyd Landis’ motion to compel Williams & Connolly to turn over documents go to: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/legaltimes/id=1202728926421/Williams-amp-Connolly-Subpoenaed-in-Lance-Armstrong-Fraud-Case#ixzz3clwhWyJn