Limited Disclosure of Case Information to Prospective Defense Counsel Not Sufficient to Warrant Disqualification of Law Firm


In an unpublished opinion, the California Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District, affirmed a trial court’s denial of a plaintiff’s motion to disqualify the defendant’s attorneys. (Cottini v. Enloe Medical Center, C062904, Nov. 5, 2010.) The plaintiff’s counsel spoke with an attorney with whom he was co-counsel on two unrelated cases. In the conversation, he referred to an unidentified negligence and abuse of dependent adult case he was handling. He identified the expert with whom he was consulting and provided information about his opinions. The plaintiff’s lawyer knew that the other attorney was considering taking a position with a defense firm, but did not know which firm. He later learned that the attorney had joined the firm representing the defendant in the negligence action.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Sedgwick LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Sedgwick LLP on:

Popular Topics
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.