La Jolla Cove Motel & Hotel Apartments, Inc. v. Superior Court

Good Law
121 Cal. App. 4th 773·17 Cal. Rptr. 3d 467·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 1332·2004 Daily Journal DAR 10137·2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7518
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 16, 2004D043922California6,543 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nares, J.

In this case we are presented with the issue of whether it is appropriate under the California State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 2-100 for attorneys to contact directors for a represented corporation where the directors’ separate counsel consents to the contact, but counsel for the corporation does not. We conclude that under the facts of this case, such contact is not barred by rule 2-100. We further conclude that even if there were a violation of rule 2-100, the court was correct not to order the disqualification of the offending attorneys as there is no evidence that they obtained any confidential information that could give their clients an unfair advantage or impact upon the fairness of the trial or integrity of the judicial system.

This action involves a complaint for dissolution of a corporation, the petitioner La Jolla Cove Motel and Hotel Apartments, Inc. (La Jolla Cove), in which the real party in interest Helen H. Jackman (Jackman), as trustee for the Helen H. Jackman Trust, owns a minority (one-third) interest, and of which her son Lawrence Jackman, Jr. (Lawrence Jackman) was formerly the president (collectively the Jackmans). La Jolla Cove…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.