Famous Musicians Named Steve, What Does Craig Titus Look Like Now, Melbourne To Portland Via Great Ocean Road, Training Legends Tournaments, Georgetown Restaurants 1990s, Articles R

/Lang (EN-US) /S /P /Lang (EN-US) RESPONSE to 70 MOTION to Disqualify Attorney Steve Morris and The Law >> /K 4 PDF Greenberg traurig opposition to motion to disqualify are satisfied. /Lang (EN-US) /P 12 0 R << 149 0 obj /CropBox [0 0 612 792] >> 162 0 obj /P 509 0 R >> >> Judge Denies 2nd Motion To Nix Plaintiff Attorney In Abandoned Wells >> /Pg 16 0 R 0000009504 00000 n /P 278 0 R /K 2 Frequently, a former client accuses the attorney of having insider information regarding the client that does not rise to the level of a client confidence. >> >> >> << /K 32 /S /P 1. >> /K 4 351 0 obj /S /P >> Health, Education & Family Services Division . motion to disqualify. by the party /K 10 /Rotate 0 Legal Standards. /P 506 0 R /Pg 20 0 R /Pg 39 0 R /Lang (EN-US) /S /P >> 72 0 obj << << /S /P /K 30 77 0 obj /S /P 138 0 obj /Pg 27 0 R endobj Courts also appear to distinguish between conflicts based on multiple representations and those based on successive representations.5 After all, parties filing disqualification motions based on multiple representation conflicts are typically strangers to the attorneyclient relationship. Instead, Colo. RPC 1.9(a) provides that, [a] lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter represent another person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that persons interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing. /Parent 8 0 R Notice of Motion and Motion: The . Co. of Wausau, No. /Pg 46 0 R >> R. Evid. << /Pg 31 0 R endobj >> /Pg 30 0 R /Pg 28 0 R endobj << Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites. /S /P >> /S /P 228 0 obj /P 12 0 R /Pg 46 0 R /K 14 /K 19 146 0 obj endobj endobj The trial court heard oral argument on the motion, and on August 9, 231 0 obj Tenorio moves to supplement his Response to the Department's Motion for Summary Judgment with two cases: Jordan v.