Nalian Truck Lines, Inc. v. Nakano Warehouse & Transportation Corp.

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 673·6 Cal. App. 4th 1256·8 Cal. Rptr. 2d 467·92 Daily Journal DAR 7189·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4550
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 27, 1992B061732California2,901 words

Opinion

Opinion

Devich, J.

Is it proper for an attorney to communicate ex parte with a former member of a corporate adversary’s “control group”? We conclude that rule 2-100 of the State Bar Rules of Professional Conduct permits such communications. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order disqualifying a law firm which engaged in such conduct.

Background

On September 16,1987, Nalian Truck Lines, Inc. (NTL), filed a complaint against Nakano Warehouse & Transportation Corp. (Nakano) alleging that, due to a fire caused by Nakano’s negligence in the building occupied by both companies, NTL sustained damages including loss of the use of its premises and loss of current and potential business.

Between late 1982 and February 1988, David Corson served as NTL’s general manager. On February 16, 1988, NTL terminated Corson’s employment. At the following shareholder’s meeting, held on March 8, 1988, Corson was removed as a director of NTL and replaced by Nalian’s sister, Martha Arakalian.

In July 1988, Corson contacted Nakano’s insurer in order to obtain the name of the law firm representing Nakano in NTL’s action against it. He was not given any information, but left his telephone number with the…

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.