Tuesday, August 10, 2010

More on Updating Conflicts and Screening Rules

A colleague forwarded a article in response to yesterday's post on New York's move to address multijurisdictional practice disciplinary and conflicts rules. Written by a partner at Hanson Bridgett, "As Firms Modernize, So Should Law on Conflicts" provides good summary and background of a case that made news earlier this summer: In Kirk v. The First American Title Insurance Company, 183 Cal.App.4th 776.

In this decision, which centered on a case of a laterally-moving lawyer with confidential information relevant to an adverse client, California's Second District Court of Appeal essentially ruled that: "If it’s done right, a non consensual screen will prevent vicarious disqualification... the court decided that evidence of an effective screen should be permitted to be presented to refute a presumption of vicarious disqualification."

And via Legal Ethics Forum, a pointer to an interesting article arguing against ongoing efforts to revise California Rules of Professional Conduct. See the linked article arguing: "Why the Proposed New Rules of Professional Conduct Should Be Rejected."

No comments:

Post a Comment