Federal Judiciary

Firm disqualified due to concurrent representation of opponent's affiliated entity

By Michael C. Smith

Honeywell Intern. Inc. v. Philips Lumileds Lighting Co., 2009 WL 256831(E.D.Tex. Jan 06, 2009) (NO. 2:07-CV-463-CE)
Judge: Chad Everingham
Judge Everingham granted the defendant's motion to disqualify the Paul Hastings firm (PHJW) from representing the plaintiff in this case, due to the fact that the firm represented entities affiliated with the defendant at the time it filed the case.  He applied ABA Model Rule 1.7 in determining whether PHJW should be disqualified, and determined that under Model Rule 1.7, Philips was required to and did establish two things: (1) that it is a current client of PHJW; and (2) that PHJW's representation of Honeywell is directly adverse to it.

Full post as published by Eastern District of Texas Federal Court Practice on February 18, 2009 (boomark / email).