Opinion ID: 2460107
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Rekdal's Deposition in the Civil Suit

Text: ¶ 19 Before the criminal trial in July 2004, Rekdal and his accounting firm, Clothier & Head, stopped representing Rennebohm and his car dealerships as clients. Six months later, Rennebohm brought a civil suit in the King County Superior Court against Clothier & Head, alleging that the firm committed malpractice by failing to discover Mullen and Dean's embezzlement sooner. In light of the civil suit, Rekdal began to limit his contact with the prosecution out of concern that he needed to coordinate the conversations through his defense counsel in the civil suit. The King County Superior Court issued protective orders covering much of the discovery. The defense was aware of the pending malpractice lawsuit. ¶ 20 After his testimony at the criminal trial, but before the trial's completion, Rekdal testified at a deposition in the civil suit between Rennebohm and Clothier & Head. Rekdal gave testimony during his deposition regarding Mullen and Dean's embezzlement. On the first day of the deposition, Rekdal testified that he believed funds left Frontier Ford unauthorized for non-Frontier Ford activity. Clerk's Papers (CP) at 6468. He also believed that Mullen and Dean's embezzlement was unlawful. CP at 6470. ¶ 21 However, during the second day of the deposition, Rekdal's testimony was more ambivalent. He testified that he relied on Rennebohm's representations to conclude that Mullen and Dean lacked authorization to spend company funds. When asked if he had since come to a different opinion, Rekdal responded, I don't know if I have an opinion one way or another on it. CP at 6564. When asked if he had a different belief than when he testified during the criminal trial, Rekdal responded, I don't know what to believe any more. Id. Rennebohm's attorney in the civil suit further pressed Rekdal on whether he had changed his belief that Rennebohm did not authorize the transactions of Mullen and Dean. CP at 6565. Rekdal responded, Not necessarily[.] ... Based on the information I have, that was my belief at the time and is probably my belief today. Best I can answer that question. Id. [2] ¶ 22 Rekdal's deposition included allegations that he caught Rennebohm in several misstatements. CP at 6567. When asked for a specific example, Rekdal said, I asked him if he had ever authorized medical insurance for Lisa Mullen, he said no. Later found documents in the employee's file that he had signed that said he did. Id. [3] ¶ 23 The other example of Rennebohm's misstatements identified by Rekdal was his representations to me regarding PIPI income. CP at 6568. Rekdal testified that he obtained schedules of the PIPI loans made to Rennebohm and Frontier Ford that identified individual and corporate loans that he was unaware of. Rekdal became concerned that Frontier Ford's tax returns understated the company's income. Subsequently, Rekdal sent a letter to Rennebohm terminating his firm's representation and recommending that Rennebohm amend his income tax returns.