Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Third Circuit recently affirmed the bankruptcy court's approved retention of the debtor's counsel ("S") when that "law firm dropped an existing client to avoid conflicts that would prevent it from taking on a more lucrative client [i.e., the debtor]." In re Boy Scouts of America, 2022 WL 1634643, *7 (3d Cir. May 24, 2022) (BSA). According to the court, there were "not enough facts to put [the so-called "hot potato" doctrine] into play" and disqualify S under the Rules of Professional Conduct. Id. Moreover, because S's representation of the debtor "did not prejudice [the objecting former client], but disqualifying [S] would have been a significant detriment to [the debtor], it was well within the [bankruptcy] court's discretion to determine that the drastic remedy of disqualification was unnecessary." Id. Particular facts of the case, highlighted by the court, supported its finding that there was "nowhere close to an abuse of discretion" by the bankruptcy court's applying Bankruptcy Code (Code) §327(a) to approve S's retention.
Conflicts of interest among clients are a chronic problem for law firms with many clients. How law firms address the problem — and they must — is what the BSA decision shows. The decision also shows the problems law firms have in balancing their ethical obligations against the desire for more business. In BSA, S was held to have acted properly, but one client still felt "jilted," if not betrayed. Id. at *1.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.