Legal Opinion

McKinney v. McMeans

District Court, W.D. Tennessee

Decided May 14, 2001No. 00-2556-DPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISQUALIFY PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL

DONALD, District Judge.

Defendant, David McMeans, filed a motion pursuant to Formal Ethics Opinions 84-F-65 and 81-F-9, and Disciplinary Rule 5-102, requesting the Court to disqualify Plaintiffs counsel, Terry Wood, because of a conflict of interest and his status as a potential witness. The Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). For the following rea sons, the Court denies Defendant’s motion to disqualify Plaintiffs counsel.

I. Factual Background

Plaintiff, a resident of Mississippi, and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In Re Dresser Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
  2. General Mill Supply Company, Manual Rotenberg and Milton Rotenberg, Plaintiffs v. Sca Services, Inc., Hale and DorrCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
  3. Manning v. Waring, Cox, James, Sklar and AllenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1988
  4. Jesse Ex Rel. Reinecke v. DanforthWisconsin Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Bartech Industries, Inc. v. International Baking Co.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1996

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. United States v. Philip Morris Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2004
  2. Modanlo v. Ahan (In Re Modanlo)District Court, D. Maryland · 2006
  3. Gracey General Partnership v. City of Clarksville, TennesseeDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2024
  4. JRS Partners, GP v. Leech Tishman Fuscaldo & Lampl, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2020
  5. Montgomery v. SmithDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2023

2 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