Chesnoff

United States v. Chesnoff

Good Law
62 F.3d 1144
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 3, 1995Nos. 94-15412, 94-15547California1,232 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wiggins, J.

OVERVIEW

David Z. Chesnoff and the law firm of Goodman & Chesnoff (collectively referred to as “Appellants”) appeal the district court’s order disqualifying them from further representation of their client and grand jury target, Richard Perry. The government argues that we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because Appellants lack standing to pursue the appeal and because the order appealed from is an unappealable interlocutory order. Although we agree on both counts, we rest our dismissal of the appeal on Appellants’ lack of standing.

FACTS

Richard Perry is the subject of an ongoing federal grand jury investigation for failure to report income to the IRS, failure to pay *1145 taxes, and attempts to hide income and assets during several years. David Z. Ches-noff, a partner in the law firm of Goodman & Chesnoff, represented Perry during this investigation, until the district court entered the disqualification order that is the subject of this appeal. No indictment against Perry has yet been returned.

In March 1993, the grand jury subpoenaed Chesnoff to testify about various issues related to Perry’s expenditures, income, and life style, and about fees paid to Goodman & Chesnoff…

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.