|
p1628 REVIEW DENIED The trial court improperly disqualified defendant's attorneys after they moved to a new firm in which an attorney in a different practice group at a different office previously obtained confidential information from plaintiffs' counsel; although there was a rebuttable presumption that the attorney with tainted knowledge shared the information with the entire firm, the court should have allowed the firm an opportunity to rebut this presumption by proving the effectiveness of its ethical screening wall.
CitationKIRK v FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE CO. (Ethical Screening) 183 CA4 776 REV DENIED [See Meza v Muehlstein & Co., 176 CA4 969]
|
|
