When can a lawyer be disqualified?

Useful Rulings on Lawyer’s Disqualification

Recent Rulings on Lawyer’s Disqualification

ANTONE NINO AND NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, A PARTNERSHIP VS NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GENERAL PARTNER, ETC., ET AL.

On January 23, 2020, the Court denied Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s anti-SLAPP motion; sustained with leave to amend Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s demurrer; and denied Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s motion to disqualify counsel.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

ANTONE NINO AND NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, A PARTNERSHIP VS NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GENERAL PARTNER, ETC., ET AL.

On January 23, 2020, the Court denied Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s anti-SLAPP motion; sustained with leave to amend Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s demurrer; and denied Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s motion to disqualify counsel.

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

JUN V. KIM

The “disqualification letter” attached as exhibit 1 to Plaintiffs’ supporting declarations is not admissible, because it is in a foreign language and the attached “translation” does not meet the requirements of Evidence Code sections 751 and 753. Thus, there is no admissible evidence that Plaintiffs were disqualified as members on the ground that they did not attend church “for 6 months without justifiable reasons.”

  • Hearing

    Jul 13, 2020

GEORGE KALO, TRUSTEE OF THE GEORGE E. KALO AND RIMONDA KALO REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST VS 1-800-BATTERY INC.

It was continued several times, initially because the matter was transferred to complex, and, subsequently due to multiple motions to disqualify counsel and other issues. During that lengthy intervening period, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint which is the operative complaint. The moving party did not file any amended notice to inform the court how or if this motion related to the Second Amended Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

EMIL MATUSENKO ET AL VS DALCO FORENSIC CONSULTANTS INC ET AL

Plaintiffs argue that balancing Plaintiffs’ interests against those of the HOA and Ross warrant disqualification of Carpenter and his firm because another defense counsel can easily be retained through Defendants’ insurance company without significant financial burden. Plaintiffs argue they are not pursuing this disqualification to punish counsel or for other tactical reasons because they do not stand to gain anything from Carpenter’s disqualification aside from avoiding potential prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ABDELLATIF JOUIBLI, ET AL. VS DIANA CAMACHO

In Opposition, Bojorquez Also argues that her counsel, Vaziri Law Group, APC, implemented an ethical screen to ensure that Stea did not have access to any Costco files, and that Stea is not currently and was not while at Yukevitch | Cavanaugh, a licensed attorney. (Oppo. at pp. 14-15.) What Costco is requesting, accordingly, is not disqualification of counsel representing the plaintiff but vicarious disqualification of the firm representing plaintiff based on Stea’s prior employment.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

PAUL ROBINSON VS SURFACE MODIFICATION SYSTEMS ET AL

forthwith; (4) for disqualification of Lee Harwell, Esq. as counsel in this action for any party; and (5) for monetary sanctions.

  • Hearing

    Jul 09, 2020

  • Judge

    Lori Ann Fournier or Olivia Rosales

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ELIZABETH BOJORQUEZ VS COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION

Hearing Date: July 8, 2020 [TENTATIVE] RULING RE: Defendant Costco wholeSALE corporation’s Motion to Disqualify attorney david c. shay and vaziri law group, apc from representing plaintiff Defendant Costco Wholesale Corporation’s Motion to Disqualify Counsel is DENIED. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This is an action for premises liability. The Complaint alleges as follows. On January 13, 2017, Plaintiff Elizabeth Bojorquez (“Bojorquez”) slipped and fell while at a Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”) store.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

In Opposition, Bojorquez Also argues that her counsel, Vaziri Law Group, APC, implemented an ethical screen to ensure that Stea did not have access to any Costco files, and that Stea is not currently and was not while at Yukevitch | Cavanaugh, a licensed attorney. (Oppo. at pp. 14-15.) What Costco is requesting, accordingly, is not disqualification of counsel representing the plaintiff but vicarious disqualification of the firm representing plaintiff based on Stea’s prior employment.

  • Hearing

    Jul 08, 2020

CHRISTOPHER S. VINCENT, ET AL. V. JOI K. STEPHENS

Nature of Proceedings: Motion to Disqualify Counsel for Plaintiff Tentative

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

CHRISTOPHER S. VINCENT, ET AL. V. JOI K. STEPHENS

Nature of Proceedings: Motion to Disqualify Counsel for Plaintiff Motion to Disqualify Mullen & Henzell, LLP as Counsel for Plaintiffs Christopher S. Vincent and Shelby G. Vincent CMC is also on calendar ATTORNEYS: Jana S. Johnston for Plaintiffs Christopher S. Vincent and Shelby G. Vincent W. Todd Stevenson for Defendant Joi K.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

NATHAN MADANI VS O'GARA COACH COMPANY LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

Defendant O’Gara filed a declaration of Behrouz Arani in which counsel for O’Gara attests that O’Gara’s prior counsel, Jon C. Abramson of The Law Offices of Kolar & Associates, contacted Plaintiff’s counsel by email on March 31, 2020 to meet and confer with grounds for the alleged insufficiency, and that these grounds are the same as set forth in the instant demurrer and motion to strike. (Arani Decl. ¶ 2.) Plaintiff’s counsel responded but the parties were unable to resolve the objections.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

NOEL LUSTIG, M.D., INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS PSYCHIATRIC MEDICAL GROUP VS MARC L. NEHORAYAN, M.D., A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

., on October 18, 2019; (4) Robert Lustig’s October 29, 2019 declaration in opposition to Defendants’ motion to disqualify Alan Goldberg as Plaintiff’s attorney of record; and (5) Robert Lustig’s Petition for Letters of Public Administration filed in Probate Court for Los Angeles County, case number 19STPB0478.

  • Hearing

    Jul 07, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

KROENKE SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT LLC VS NICOLAS A. SALOMON, ET AL.

of which the arbitrator was then aware, or (B) was subject to disqualification upon grounds specified in section 1281.91 but failed upon receipt of timely demand to disqualify himself or herself as required by that provision.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

ROBERT LANSING, ET AL. VS CSL 13 ALYSON POURAT, ET AL.

(6) An arbitrator making the award either: (A) failed to disclose within the time required for disclosure a ground for disqualification...; or (B) was subject to disqualification upon grounds specified in Section 1281.91 but failed upon receipt of timely demand to disqualify himself or herself as required by that provision. . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1286.4, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

KROENKE SPORTS & ENTERTAINMENT LLC VS NICOLAS A. SALOMON, ET AL.

of which the arbitrator was then aware, or (B) was subject to disqualification upon grounds specified in section 1281.91 but failed upon receipt of timely demand to disqualify himself or herself as required by that provision.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

INTELLIGENT SCM LLC ET AL VS RUSSELL W ROTEN ET AL

Atkinson/Walsh Joint Venture (2017) 15 Cal.App.5th 872, 883 [in the case of an appeal of a denial of a disqualification motion, which is not subject to an automatic stay, the appealing party may “seek relief from the trial court or appellate court to stay proceedings ‘to maintain the status quo pending the appeal’”]); (see also Reed v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2020

ROBERT LANSING, ET AL. VS CSL 13 ALYSON POURAT, ET AL.

(6) An arbitrator making the award either: (A) failed to disclose within the time required for disclosure a ground for disqualification...; or (B) was subject to disqualification upon grounds specified in Section 1281.91 but failed upon receipt of timely demand to disqualify himself or herself as required by that provision. . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1286.4, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

LONG BONETTI OFFICE, LLC V. HAMISH MARSHALL

A motion to modify a subpoena served on defense counsel is also calendared for August 20, 2020. Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to disqualify defense counsel, Roy Ogden. “A trial court is empowered to disqualify counsel through its inherent power ‘[t]o control in furtherance of justice, the conduct of its ministerial officers, and of all other persons in any manner connected with a judicial proceeding before it, in every matter pertaining thereto.’ (Code Civ. Proc., § 128, subd.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

When analyzing a motion to disqualify counsel, “the court must weigh the combined effect of a party's right to counsel of choice, an attorney's interest in representing a client, the financial burden on a client of replacing disqualified counsel and any tactical abuse underlying a disqualification proceeding .…” (William H. Raley Co. v. Superior Court (1983) 149 Cal.App.3d 1042, 1048.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

STARS AND BARS, LLC V WESTPORT CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC

There is no basis to disqualify counsel under CRPC 1.7 Is Bordin, Bordin Semmer, or BB Law Group disqualified under CRPC 1.9? Rule 1.9 prevents a lawyer who has formerly represented a client from representing another person “in the same or substantially related matter, in which that person’s interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client” unless the former client gives informed consent.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

ANTONE NINO AND NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, A PARTNERSHIP VS NASRIN SHAKERI NINO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS GENERAL PARTNER, ETC., ET AL.

On January 23, 2020, the Court denied Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s anti-SLAPP motion; sustained with leave to amend Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s demurrer; and denied Defendant Nasrin Shakeri Nino’s motion to disqualify counsel.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

FAYE PIERSON, ET AL. VS. JESUS DURAZO, ET AL.

Counsel for Plaintiff was informed and directed to give notice, and a copy of the minute order was mailed to counsel. Motion for Order to Turn Over On January 10, 2020, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion for David A. Cordier ("Cordier") to be relieved as counsel and denied Plaintiffs' motion to disqualify Cordier. The motion for order to turn over was filed on March 12, 2020. The original hearing date for the motion was April 3, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JASON KANG VS CHRISTIAN RADO

Finally, ‘whenever an adversary declares his intent to call opposing counsel as a witness, prior to ordering disqualification of counsel, the court should determine whether counsel’s testimony is, in fact, genuinely needed.’

  • Hearing

    Jun 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

JOSE M FLORES RIVERA VS. CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE APPEALS BOARD

Riddle and her attorneys had no notice of the hearing of the first motion on March 12, 1943, counsel should be excused for not attending to present their motion. Certainly under these facts the trial court was fully justified in concluding that this order was made through the ‘inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect’ ( Code Civ. Proc., § 473) of counsel for Mrs. Riddle.”].)

  • Hearing

    Jun 26, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 75     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.