Knight

Knight v. Ferguson

Good Law
149 Cal. App. 4th 1207·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 600·2007 Daily Journal DAR 5341·57 Cal. Rptr. 3d 823·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4203
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 18, 20072d Civil No. B194512California2,629 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

Plaintiff moves to recuse defendants’ lawyer in a lawsuit over a partnership and lease agreement. Prior to the lawsuit, the attorney briefly represented plaintiff to discuss her concerns about the partnership and lease agreement with another party involving the same business that is the subject matter of the lawsuit. Plaintiff knew that the attorney had represented defendants in other matters. Defendants were present at the meetings between plaintiff and the attorney, and privy to all their discussions.

Did the trial court properly disqualify the attorney? Yes. Defendants’ presence at meetings between plaintiff and the attorney does not sufficiently attenuate the attorney’s conflict. To separate the conflict from the two sets of clients is to separate the silk from the thread. It cannot be done.

Defendants Perry Ferguson and Paula Ferguson appeal an order granting plaintiff Laura Knight’s motion to disqualify the Fergusons’ attorney, Richard Wideman. Knight had consulted previously with Wideman about forming a partnership and entering into a commercial lease to establish a new restaurant. The dispute between Knight and the Fergusons concerns that business venture. There…

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.