In an unusual application of the lawyer-witness rule, a district court recently held that the rule would not prevent an assistant state attorney general from being on an open phone line along with the court and other party representatives during the execution of a death-row inmate — even though the assistant AG might have to
Luxury ride over: TX court disqualifies former Rolls-Royce lawyer based on conflict
Do you toil in the pressure cooker of a firm, but dream of going in-house? Many lawyers have that goal. But the churn works in the other direction, too, with in-house lawyers migrating to firms or solo practice. When they do, they can face conflict of interest issues leading to disqualification, as a former in-house
PA lawyer suspended for “textbook” conflict of interest after representation adverse to assault victim
Representing a campus sexual assault victim-turned-activist and later using her confidential information in representing an alleged campus assailant with interests adverse to the former client is a “textbook” conflict of interest. That’s the message the Pennsylvania Supreme Court sent in suspending a lawyer for a year in a consent-to-discipline case published this week.
Former -client
Failing to notify opposing counsel of client’s “burn files” leads to disqualification in NJ case
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 Applying it, together with other principles, a New Jersey appeals court, in an unpublished ruling, recently disqualified a firm from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
Conducting third-party discovery against a current client? Tread carefully
What if you’re about to initiate litigation on behalf of your client, or you are in the middle of litigation, and you find that a different client you represent in another matter has documents relevant to the case? Can you subpoena the documents from your own client? Can you cross-examine that client at trial? Here
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
Bring third-party funders out of “the shadows,” U.S. Chamber asks federal rules committee
Litigation funding is in the news again, with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spearheading a request to amend the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to require initial disclosure of all third-party agreements for compensation that are “contingent on, and sourced from, any proceeds of the civil action, by settlement, judgment or otherwise.”
The Chamber joined
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.