In Premier Dealer Services, Inc. v. Duhon, Nos. 12-1498, 12-2790 (E.D. La. Oct. 21, 2013), the court held that the Shelton doctrine did not prohibit the deposition of in-house counsel who was not acting as litigation counsel and who would be deposed regarding matters in which in-house counsel acted more as a business adviser rather than in a legal capacity.  In this trademark infringement case, defendant sought the deposition of a corporate in-house attorney who simultaneously held the positions of Senior Vice President of Legal, Compliance and Human Resources.  Plaintiff moved to quash on the grounds that in-house counsel had been a part of the litigation team and had held litigation strategy discussions with litigation counsel, directed the course of the action, decided on trial strategy, edited pleadings, and assisted in gathering and reviewing relevant documents.  As a result, the Shelton doctrine, which restricts depositions of opposing litigation counsel, should prohibit the deposition.  The court first held that the Shelton doctrine did not apply, because in-house counsel had not in fact acted as trial counsel.  The court also found that, even if the Shelton doctrine applied, it would not prohibit deposition questioning that went to issues in which in-house counsel acted as a “business advisor” rather than in a legal capacity.”