Legal Opinion
In re the Estate of O'Malley
New York Surrogate's Court
Decided November 29, 1988PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
George B. Ceresia, Jr., S.
In this contested probate proceeding, objectants, pursuant to the "advocate-witness rule” embodied in the Code of Professional Responsibility, have moved to disqualify proponent’s counsel on the basis that proponent’s counsel will be required to be a trial witness.
Proponent concedes that at the actual trial, proponent’s counsel would be disqualified, and in fact, proponent has already arranged for a separate "trial counsel”. However, proponent argues that disqualification is not required at this stage of the proceeding.
FACTS
Proponent Alice Moran…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- S & S Hotel Ventures Limited Partnership v. 777 S. H. Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
- North Shore Neurosurgical Group v. LeivyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Tru-Bite Labs, Inc. v. AshmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
3Cited by2 opinions
- In re the Estate of WalshNew York Surrogate's Court · 2007
- In re the Estate of GiantasioNew York Surrogate's Court · 1997