Shadow Traffic Network v. Superior Court

Good Law
1994 Cal. App. LEXIS 435·24 Cal. App. 4th 1067·29 Cal. Rptr. 2d 693·94 Daily Journal DAR 5966·94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3162
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 2, 1994B079011California8,270 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

Introduction

Metro Traffic Control, Inc. (Metro), and Shadow Traffic Network (Shadow) are competitors in the traffic reporting business. Each contracts with radio stations to gather and broadcast information about traffic conditions. In December 1991, Metro sued Shadow, alleging that Shadow was engaging in various business torts.

Each was represented by counsel—Metro by Andrews & Kurth and Shadow by Latham & Watkins. However, in September 1993, the trial court granted Metro’s motion to disqualify Latham & Watkins from further representation of Shadow because Latham & Watkins had retained as an expert witness an individual previously interviewed by Andrews & Kurth and to whom confidential information about Metro’s lawsuit had been disclosed. This petition by Shadow contests the recusal order. Based upon the record and relevant precedent, we find that the conduct of Latham & Watkins compels disqualification in this case. We therefore uphold the trial court’s order and deny the petition.

Factual and Procedural Background

Metro’s Meeting With Deloitte & Touche

On July 19, 1993, two attorneys from Andrews & Kurth, Kathy Jorrie and Valerie Langs, met with four…

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.