What are your ethics obligations when your client gives you documents that the client may not be entitled to have? Model Rule 4.4(b), adopted in some form by most jurisdictions, provides some guidance. Applying it, together with other principles, a New Jersey appeals court, in an unpublished ruling, recently disqualified a firm from
PA court disqualifies Drinker Biddle in pharma company ownership dispute
A Pennsylvania state court judge disqualified Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP earlier this month from appearing for either defendant in a shareholder dispute involving a Philadelphia LLC that provides services to pharmaceutical companies. The opinion spotlights the conflict issues that can come up when representing an entity and its controlling member against a claimed minority
Prospective client? Not so fast, says district court in DQ ruling
If you’re driving from state to state, the rules of the road are generally consistent. While details may differ, a red light means “stop” in every state of the Union. But under our federal system, each U.S. jurisdiction has authority to regulate the practice of law — and under the resulting state ethics rules, not
One potato, two potato; hot potato brings DQ in Mississippi federal case
Even though a Mississippi lawyer’s conflict of interest lasted only one day, that was enough for a U.S. magistrate judge to disqualify him from representing a client adverse to Allstate Insurance Co. on a coverage claim, in a ruling issued last week. Sending a termination letter to the insurer the day after accepting the new
How far does DQ extend? NY appeals court says not that far, reinstating co-counsel
When a conflict of interest crops up during a case, Ethics 101 tells us that the “taint” of that conflict can spread, and potentially knock out all the lawyers of the affected firm. Model Rule 1.10, “Imputation of Conflicts” explains the rule. But how far does that disqualification go? A New York appeals court examined this question in December, and reversed a DQ order in a personal injury suit.
Continue Reading How far does DQ extend? NY appeals court says not that far, reinstating co-counsel
Ethics opinion nixes use of verein names in TX, but firms say “Business as usual.”
As we’ve predicted before, the increasing globalization of high-level legal practice continues to create questions about forms of legal practice – in particular, vereins, a structure aimed at letting firms based in different countries operate under a unified brand. Mega-firms Fulbright & Jaworski and Dentons have faced motions to disqualify centered on structural issues, and now a Texas ethics opinion issued last month questions whether lawyers in the Lone Star state can use a verein name on pleadings.
Continue Reading Ethics opinion nixes use of verein names in TX, but firms say “Business as usual.”
Violating confidentiality order results in lawyer’s DQ and referral to state ethics board
Courts often analyze motions to disqualify by balancing the need to uphold professional standards against the rights of clients to choose their lawyers freely. The New Jersey court of appeals struck that balance earlier this month in upholding the disqualification of a lawyer who violated a confidentiality order, finding that the lawyer knowingly disobeyed a court order, among other violations.
Continue Reading Violating confidentiality order results in lawyer’s DQ and referral to state ethics board
Negotiating for legal employment with the “other side” raises ethics issues
When you start planning to leave your firm for greener pastures, lots of ethics issues can crop up (bad pun). One of the most acute issues is if you get an offer to join a firm that is on the opposite side of a matter you are already handling. That was the situation in a
Celgard DQ decision– sky is not falling, but representing economic competitors still merits caution
Celgard, LLC v. LG Chem, Ltd., a disqualification case decided by the Federal Circuit, continues to make waves. Insightful commentary from Ronald Rotunda is here; he notes that typing the case name into Google yields more than 5,000 hits.
Last December, when the opinion came out, there was concern (see here and here
“Comprehensive” ethical screen fails to avoid disqualification from side-switching paralegal
Small may be beautiful, but when it comes to law firms, small can signal disqualification troubles that a bigger firm might sometimes be able to avoid, according to the reasoning of a recent opinion.
We’ve posted here before about screening non-lawyer personnel in order to avoid imputed disqualification when a secretary or paralegal arrives