California Court of Appeal

Disqualification of law firm representing defendants, which had previously represented plaintiff prior to plaintiff's liquidation, is reversed as disqualification of counsel is not justified based on either the concurrent representation of parties with conflicting interests or the successive representation of adverse parties in substantially related matters.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/20/2006
• Published 09/20/2006

Judges

• CROSKEY, Acting P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl, Young, Jones & Weintraub, Iain A.W. Nasatir, James K.T. Hunter, Los Angeles;  Greines, Martin, Stein & Richland, Kent L. Richland, Marc J. Poster and Tillman J. Breckenridge, Los Angeles, for Defendants and Appellants., Munger, Tolles & Olson, Mark Epstein and Marc T.G. Dworsky, Los Angeles, for Los Angeles County Bar Association as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Appellants., Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, W. Dean Freeman, Mark P. Richelson, Raymond B. Jue, Deputy Attorneys General;  Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, Thomas J. Welsh, James E. Houpt and Stacy E. Don for Plaintiffs and Respondents.