Brian D. Carey v. Steven Jones

46 F.3d 1139 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Brian D. CAREY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Steven JONES, Defendant-Appellee. No. 92-55428. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 8, 1994. * Decided Jan. 5, 1995. Before: BROWNING, GOODWIN, and FERGUSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORNADUM ** 2 Brian D. Carey appeals pro se the rulings of the district court in his breach of contract action to recover attorney's fees. Carey contends that the district court erred by 1) enforcing the settlement agreement between the two parties, 2) refusing to disqualify Judge Williams from hearing further proceedings in the case, and 3) refusing to allow substitution of counsel. We reject these contentions and affirm. 3 Carey's primary basis for challenging enforcement of the settlement agreement is that a conflict of interest allegedly existed between him and his attorney during the negotiation of the settlement. Even if a conflict existed, however, Carey waived the…