Essex Chemical Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HEDGES, United States Magistrate Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Essex Chemical Corporation and Essex Specialty Products, Inc. (“Essex”) seek an order disqualifying all defense counsel due to the existence of a conflict of interest. 1 Alternatively, Essex requests that I direct all defense counsel to respond to interrogatories which pertain to communications and documents exchanged between all defense counsel. I have considered the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motion. I heard oral argument on April 28.1997.
II. BACKGROUND
This motion arises in a declaratory…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Haines v. Liggett Group Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- United States v. Robert McPartlinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1979
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,675 James M. Richardson v. Hamilton International CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- Charles Glueck v. Jonathan Logan, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Mitchell A. KRAMER and David C. Harrison v. SCIENTIFIC CONTROL CORP. Et Al. Appeal of ARTHUR ANDERSEN & CO.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Cendant Corp. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
- Greig v. MacY's Northeast, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1998
- American Special Risk Ins. Ex Rel. South MacOmb Disposal Authority v. City of CenterlineDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1999