Once an attorney recognizes that he is “likely” to be a witness in litigation, he must choose whether he will proceed as advocate or witness; he may not choose both. Id, at 440. Generally speaking, motions to disqualify are viewed with disfavor as disqualification is a remedy with broad implications.
Full Answer
A lawyer shall not act as advocate at a trial in which the lawyer is likely to be a necessary witness except where: (1)the testimony relates to an uncontested issue; (2)the testimony relates to the nature and value of legal services rendered in the case; (3)disqualification of the lawyer would work substantial hardship on the client.
In a recent decision from Suffolk’s Commercial Division by Justice Pines, the Court provides a review of the Lawyer as Witness rule codified in Disciplinary Rule 5-102 (b), ( (See also 22 N.Y.C.R.R. § 1200.21)) as well as the case law interpreting the same. The Order by Justice Pines is consistent with two recent decisions from the Second Department which likewise deny …
Jan 06, 2016 · Generally, if the lawyer is also an advocate, he/she must step aside: a) if the lawyer knows or believes that the lawyer is or may be a witness; b) necessary to establish an essential fact on behalf of his or her client; c) unless prompt notification has been given to opposing side and disqualification would work a substantial hardship on the client; and d) in any event, the …
It is only appropriate to disqualify an attorney due to her status as a potential witness if the attorney’s testimony is “necessary to establish an essential fact.” TEX. DISCIPLINARY R. PROF’L CONDUCT 3.08(a); Sanders, 153 S.W. 3d at 57. The fact that a lawyer serves, or may serve, as both an advocate and a witness does not in itself
Disqualifying the opponent’s expert witness is often necessary when the case demands progress and additional assistance. However, doing so may be complicated and difficult depending on various factors such as a credible individual with extensive years of experience and knowledge.
The lawyer hired for the case may choose one of various different strategies to employ to disqualify an expert. However, whichever course he or she has decided upon, he or she must ensure there is enough evidence that a judge cannot overlook it. It may be easier to disqualify someone based on credentials or relevance to the case.
If the expert witness is unable to qualify due to his or her credentials, it is easy to disqualify him or her. However, there are other ways to do so as well to include when he or she is not complying with state and local laws. It may be important to review these to ensure the opposing expert is in compliance.
It is usually only necessary when the expert is not credible through his or her own qualifications or he or she could be the subject of a Daubert challenge. However, a conflict of interest may be included such as when the expert is a former employee of the client, lawyer or other expert witness. If he or she is not ethically performing to ...
The best way to deal with motions to disqualify is to prevent them. Two important pre-motion strategies are effective. First, identify and resolve potential conflicts, including both multiple and successive representations, before undertaking a representation or hiring a lateral.
Upon receiving a motion to disqualify, the attorney should promptly notify the client. Attempting to defeat the motion without advising the client is not an acceptable solution.
Attorneys understandably may feel apprehensive about the threat of a motion to disqualify, given the potential risk and loss of work. However, by understanding the underpinnings of this ethical issue, attorneys will be better prepared to anticipate, respond to, or even avoid motions to disqualify.
1. E.g., Celgard, LLC v. LG Chem., Ltd, No. 2014-1675 (Fed.Cir. Dec. 10, 2014) (order disqualifying Jones Day), assets.law360news.com/ 0606000/606910/Celgard-LGC%20Order%20disqualifying%20 Jones%20Day.pdf.; Utica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau, No. 6:12-cv-01293-NAM-TWD (N.D.N.Y. Dec.
A motion to disqualify tests whether the opposing party’s right to counsel of his or her choice, which is an important right, “must yield to ethical considerations that affect the fundamental principles of our judicial process.”.
The courts apply a two-pronged test to determine whether the court must conclusively presume that an attorney has knowledge of confidential information about a prior client that requires the court to disqualify the attorney from representing a current client adverse to the prior client.