Jessen

Jessen v. Hartford Casualty Insurance

Good Law
111 Cal. App. 4th 698·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1308·2003 Daily Journal DAR 9680·3 Cal. Rptr. 3d 877·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7767
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 25, 2003No. F041425California5,351 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Dibiaso, J.

This appeal is taken from an order denying the motion of appellant Hartford Casualty Insurance Company (Hartford) to disqualify the law firm of Wilkins, Drolshagen & Czeshinski LLP (the Firm) from representing respondent Claude Jessen, doing business as Ethylene Filters.Com (Jessen), in this action against appellant. Respondent’s counsel of record, James H. Wilkins, a partner in the Firm, was once an attorney with McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Cairuth (McCormick), where he had represented appellant in numerous matters.

The trial court found that prior orders denying motions by appellant to disqualify Wilkins and the Firm from representing the plaintiffs in two earlier *703 federal court actions against appellant operated to collaterally estop appellant from disqualifying Wilkins and the Firm in this action. Because we find in the unpublished portion of this opinion that this ruling was erroneous, we will reverse and remand, with directions to the trial court to rehear the motion on its merits and to apply the correct legal standard—the “substantial relationship” test—which we address in the published portion of this opinion. (Flatt v. Superior Court (1994) 9…

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.