Henriksen
Henriksen v. Great American Savings & Loan
Opinion
Opinion
[Opinion certified for partial publication. [*] ]
OPINION
POCHE, J.
(1) Appellants Frederick M. Henriksen and Ramon A. Zambrano appeal from an order disqualifying [1] the law firm of Bartko, Welsh, Tarrant & Miller from further representing them in the underlying litigation. At issue is whether a law firm may continue to represent a client where during the pendency of litigation it hires an associate who formerly represented the adverse party in the same proceeding. We follow Dill v. Superior Court (1984) 158 Cal. App.3d 301 [ 205 Cal. Rptr. 671 ], and hold that the associate's disqualification results in the vicarious disqualification of the entire law firm. This disqualification is compelled even if the law firm takes measures to insulate the new associate from any involvement in the current litigation.
The underlying dispute concerns a construction loan made to appellants by respondents, Great American Savings and Loan, and its subsidiary, Mountain South Corporation, for a residential condominium project in San Francisco. Appellants commenced the suit in January of 1989. Two months later, respondents responded with a cross-complaint for judicial foreclosure.