The District of Columbia Court of Appeals held that the Rules of Professional Conduct on preserving client confidences, while broader in scope than the evidentiary rule of attorney-client privilege, do not have the legal effect of expanding the evidentiary privilege, and ordered the attorney for a plaintiff in a real estate transaction suit to give deposition testimony regarding a demand letter the defendants received. The court concluded that the information requested was not privileged or, if it was, the client had waived the confidentiality.