Legal Opinion

Beilowitz v. General Motors Corp.

District Court, D. New Jersey

Decided October 28, 2002No. Civil Action 02-3870PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ORLOFSKY, District Judge.

In this hotly contested New Jersey Franchise Practices Act case, General Motors (“GM”) has moved to disqualify Pepper Hamilton LLP (“Pepper Hamilton”), one of the law firms representing Plaintiff, Steven I. Beilowitz (“Beilowitz”). GM contends that Pepper Hamilton’s legal representation of Urban Science, Inc. (“Urban Science”), GM’s likely fact and expert wit ness in this case, warrants the disqualification of Pepper Hamilton from representing Beilowitz. For the reasons set forth below, I find that Pepper Hamilton’s representation of Beilowitz in this matter…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Dewey v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
  2. Cardona v. General Motors Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1996
  3. State v. LoyalSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2000
  4. In Re Cendant Corp. Securities LitigationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
  5. Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. Alza Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1992

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Beilowitz v. General Motors Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API