FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER CO. V. RISJORD
449 U.S. 368 (1981)
NATURE OF THE CASE: This was an appeal from a denial of a motion to disqualify counsel for the opposing party in a civil case.
FACTS: P sued Firestone (D) for alleged defects in their truck tire products. P charged D with various negligent, willful, or intentional failures to correct or to warn of supposed defects in the rims. The lawyer for P was insured by Home Insurance Co. and Home was listed as an occasional client of the lawyer and he also represented the insurer on matters unrelated to the current litigation. D filed a motion to disqualify Respondent from further representation of P. D argued that Respondent had a motive to structure any relief for Ps in such a manner as to enable Home to avoid any liability and thus increasing their own. Respondent filed an affidavit in which he stated that he had informed both Ps and Home of the potential conflict and neither objected to it. Respondent was allowed to continue to represent Ps. D objected and filed notice of appeal pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 1291. The Eight Circuit decided the case en banc and affirmed the trial court's order. The Supreme Court granted certiorari.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND
DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
No comments:
Post a Comment