Skip to main content
Find a Lawyer

United States Seventh Circuit


Huusko v. Endicott, 07-2660

In a collateral attack on a conviction alleging that the defendant's appellate attorney furnished ineffective assistance of counsel by not calling a witness whom the attorney had represented in another matter, judgment against defendant is affirmed where, under the Wisconsin ethical rules, lawyers must maintain a former client's confidences but do not have a duty to protect a former client's current legal interests, thus there was no conflict of interest.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 02/18/2009
  • Published 02/18/2009

Judges

  • EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge., Before EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge, and POSNER and EVANS, Circuit Judges.

Court

  • United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

  • For Appellant:
  • Steven J. Winger, argued, Winston & Strawn, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner-Appellant.

  • For Appellees:
  • Katherine L. Tripp, Katherine D. Lloyd, argued, Office of the Attorney General, Madison, WI, for Respondent-Appellee.
Copied to clipboard