CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW
...Procedure Before Trial/Hearing
......Conflicts of Interest
.........General Rule
 14 Cards On This Topic:
  • Trial court has inherent power to control proceedings and persons appearing before it.
  • Representing adverse interests; disclosure and consent.
  • As juvenile court applied wrong legal standards re motion to disqualify C's atty, reconsideration appropriate.
  • An attorney seeking advice from her own firm or outside counsel regarding her ethical or other obligations to her client does not create a conflict of interest; if error prejudicing client was committed, attorney must comply with disclosure rules.
  • Disqualification reversed where no evidence of simultaneous representation.
  • Disqualification of law firm from representation of defendant mandatory where its new hire attorney had worked for plaintiff on same matter.
  • Disqualification of law firm from representation of defendant affirmed where its new hire attorney had worked for plaintiff on a different matter, and firm imposed an ineffective ethical wall.
  • Where law firm was vicariously disqualified from case based on a new hire in a geographically distant office who then left during the pendency of the disqualification appeal, disqualification reversed and remanded.
  • Duty of loyalty is the proper focus in concurrent representation cases; duty of confidentiality is the proper focus in successive representation cases.
  • Law firm must be disqualified when it associates lawyer who formerly obtained confidential info from opposing party, even w/o evidence confidential information was shared between firm and associated counsel.
  • Under substantial relationship test, trial ct. should have granted motion to disqualify attorney who formerly represented adverse party.
  • If attorney's former representation is "substantially related" to current representation, knowledge of confidential information is presumed and disqualification required.
  • Absent showing of "substantial relationship," courts are reluctant to disqualify a party's chosen counsel; burden is on party claiming conflict. Waiting until eve of trial is tactical abuse.
  • Right to be represented by attorney of choice ought not be abrogated absent injury to integrity of judicial process or unfair prejudice to adverse party by use of confidential information.


    •