Legal Opinion

Haleck v. TRT, Inc.

High Court of American Samoa

Decided June 27, 2003No. CA No. 20-02Published

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISQUALIFY COUNSEL FROM REPRESENTING BOTH CORPORATE AND INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS

The Plaintiffs, shareholders of Defendant TRT, Inc. (“TRT”), brought a shareholder’s derivative suit alleging, inter alia, that Defendant Agaoleatu Tautolo (“Agaoleatu”), a director of both TRT and Defendant American Samoa 2000, Inc. (“AS2000”), breached his fiduciary duty to *135the corporations.1 They now move to disqualify the attorneys from representing both the corporations and the individual defendants, as directors of the corporations.

I. BACKGROUND

For purposes of this motion a little…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Ross v. BernhardSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Cannon v. US Acoustics CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1975
  3. Rowen v. LeMars Mutual Insurance Co. of IowaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1975
  4. Lewis v. Shaffer Stores CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1963
  5. In Re Oracle Securities LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1993

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API