A federal judge Wednesday ordered no depositions be taken of prominent Democratic power broker and gay rights advocate Terry Bean or of any others for a civil suit seeking millions of dollars in damages from Bean while he fights criminal charges in state court.

Bean is scheduled for trial in November in Lane County Circuit Court in Eugene on allegations of third-degree sex abuse and third-degree sodomy of a 15-year-old in in September 2013.

Bean also is named in a federal civil suit filed by another man identified only as R.J.V. He has accused Bean of having sex with him at least three times between Sept. 1 and Dec. 30, 2013, and of soliciting nude photographs from him when R.J.V. was 17.

The lawyers representing R.J.V. also represent the alleged victim, M.S.G., in the pending criminal case, Bean’s lawyer, Clifford S. Davison, noted.

He argued that R.J.V’s lawyers are trying to use the civil case to “provide an unfair advantage in the criminal one.’’

“Information provided by Bean in this action almost certainly would find its way to the Lane County District Attorney,” Davidson wrote to the court.

Moving forward with the civil case by R.J.V. would require Bean to reveal evidence that Bean plans to use against R.J.V. should he testify against Bean in the criminal case, Davidson also argued.

Waiting another four months to hear a case that wasn’t filed until four years after the alleged behavior wouldn’t harm R.J.V., Davidson said.

“Bean would be highly prejudiced if this case were to proceed. He has been indicted. His Fifth Amendment rights and his ability to defend against this civil suit would be prejudiced,” Davidson wrote in his motion.

“Because both the purported victim in the Parallel Criminal Action, and R.J.V., were minors at the time of the alleged incidents, there is a substantial risk that evidence collected in this case will be used against Bean in the Parallel Criminal Action as evidence of a purported sexual interest in minors,” he wrote.

Attorneys Christine Mascal and Sean Riddell, who represent R.J.V., countered that Bean has provided no evidence that gathering discovery in the civil case would be relevant to Bean’s conduct in the criminal case.

They also argued that the judge could limit any of their inquiry into Bean’s alleged conduct in the criminal case and that Bean is free to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate himself to any deposition question in the civil case.

Mascal said in court that the criminal and civil cases aren’t parallel, involve two different alleged victims and R.J.V. hasn’t been subpoenaed at this point to appear in Bean’s criminal trial.

“Plaintiff has a right to be heard and seek redress by the court independent of defendant’s other legal entanglements,’’ Riddell argued in court papers. “Defendant is not entitled to special treatment because he is facing unrelated criminal charges and civil complaints.’’

U.S. Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta said he’d allow paperwork or electronic information to be shared between lawyers on both sides of the R.J.V. civil case, but that the material must be held for “attorney’s eyes only,’’ not be shared with anyone else and must be placed under a protective order.

The judge also ordered that any other discovery information or depositions of Bean or other people be put on hold until after Bean’s criminal case concludes.

Should the prosecutor in the Eugene case serve a subpoena on the lawyers in the civil case for any information exchanged under the protective order, the subpoena won’t be effective, meaning it won’t override the court-ordered protective order, Acosta said.

If any information gleaned from the R.J.V. civil case is shared by lawyers with state prosecutors handling the criminal case, Acosta threatened to issue a contempt finding and dismiss the civil suit for good.

In court records, Bean’s lawyer pointed to testimony that R.J.V. gave in a Washington County trial in September 2015 against Bean’s ex-boyfriend, Kiah Lawson. R.J.V. said then that he had visited Bean’s house in 2013 with the intention of having sex with Bean so Bean would “spoil” him with fancy clothes and other gifts, but Bean didn’t have sex with him because R.J.V. failed to show identification, according to Bean’s lawyer.

“Terry Bean is the subject of a baseless civil lawsuit by someone who testified under oath in court that he and Terry did not have sex, but seems to have changed his tune in the face of a multi-million-dollar civil recovery,’’ Davidson said in a statement. “Once the false criminal charges in the Lane County proceeding have been discredited, Terry will vigorously defend himself against this latest attempt to profit from his stature. In the meantime, and as the federal judge acknowledged this morning, Bean must ensure that he receives a fair criminal trial by staying discovery in the civil case.’’

Another civil suit in federal court is pending against Bean filed by M.S.G., the alleged victim in the criminal case. MSG in the civil case alleges Bean offered him a $220,000 settlement to drop his criminal case against Bean four years ago.

Bean, now 70, was indicted in January on charges of sodomy and sex abuse in the case. Bean has pleaded not guilty. His trial is set for Nov. 13.

It’s the second time Bean was indicted in the same case. The first indictment in November 2014 was dismissed without prejudice on Sept. 1, 2015, after M.S.G. didn’t testify.

M.S.G. has been trying to recover the full $220,000 settlement that he says his then-lawyer, Lori Deveny, allegedly stole from him. Deveny is now facing multiple federal and state criminal charges, alleging she stole hundreds of thousands of dollars from legal settlements awarded to her clients. She has pleaded not guilty.

Bean has admitted paying the $220,000 to Deveny to avoid a potential civil suit that M.S.G. had threatened against him but denied any wrongdoing. Bean’s lawyers told the court that it was Deveny who initially approached Bean’s lawyer with the idea of a payment offer.

“Given that a salacious allegation, even without merit, can have extremely negative impacts on the reputation and livelihood of a business leader and activist such as Bean, it is not uncommon for individuals to settle civil claims without an admission of liability or wrongdoing,’’ according to a declaration from Derek Ashton, Bean’s lawyer at the time, which is quoted in federal court documents. “In this case, the settlement agreements explicitly state that the documents cannot be construed as an admission or evidence of any civil or criminal claim.”

M.S.G. contends Deveny instructed him to hide in central Oregon to avoid being compelled to testify in the first criminal case against Bean. He accuses Bean of bribery and witness tampering, and contends Deveny forged his signature on the settlement, according to his civil suit.

M.S.G. in a declaration filed in federal court said Deveny moved him and his guardian around “central Oregon and California, from July 20, 2015, to Aug. 30, 2015, and Deveny told him it was necessary to hide from the state and avoid testifying against Bean, if I wanted to receive a financial settlement.’’

To counter the allegations, Bean’s lawyer presented to the court transcript testimony in which Deveny said her client was reluctant and not interested in pursuing the first criminal prosecution against Bean.

Ashton also is under criminal investigation in connection with the initial prosecution of Bean and Bean’s $220,000 payment or alleged misconduct that includes bribery and witness tampering, a Lane County prosecutor revealed during a court hearing in June. Ashton has denied any wrongdoing.

-- Maxine Bernstein

Email at mbernstein@oregonian.com

Follow on Twitter @maxoregonian

Visit subscription.oregonlive.com/newsletters to get Oregonian/OregonLive journalism delivered to your email inbox.