Newton

Bridgepoint Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Newton

Good Law
237 Cal. Rptr. 3d 598·26 Cal. App. 5th 966
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 4, 20182d Civ. No. B283239California1,481 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Gilbert, J.

*599 An attorney represents more than one client, all of whom seek damages from a pool of money controlled by another party. In addition to multiple other reasons why the attorney here should be disqualified, when more than one client is seeking funds from the same source, the conflict is self-evident. There might not be enough money to satisfy each client's claim.

This is an appeal from an order disqualifying an attorney for a conflict of interest. We affirm.

FACTS

Bridgepoint Construction Services, Inc. (Bridgepoint) was hired by Vista Oceano La Mesa Venture, LLC (Vista) to perform construction services on a project in Santa Barbara. Bridgepoint has two shareholders, Norman Salter, who owns 25 percent, and Martin Newton, who owns 75 percent. Newton also has an interest in Vista. Salter and Dilip Ram are business associates.

Bridgepoint and Salter brought an action against Vista, Newton and others, alleging defendants owed them approximately $2 million for construction services.

Vista cross-complained against Salter, Ram and others, alleging Salter and Ram diverted assets from Bridgepoint, depriving Vista of moneys due to it. In December 2014, Robert Klein became attorney of…

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.