Legal Opinion

Jackson v. Ingersoll-Rand Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 23, 1996No. A070086PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

STRANKMAN, P. J.

Defense counsel was disqualified for communicating with plaintiff’s ex-wife, a former plaintiff whose loss of consortium cause of action was dismissed over two years earlier after she separated from plaintiff. The trial court found that defense counsel’s communication violated a professional ethics rule proscribing communications with represented parties. (Rules Prof. Conduct, rule 2-100 [Deering’s Cal. Codes Ann. Rules (State Bar) (1988 ed., 1995 pocket supp.)] (Rule 2-100.) Plaintiff claims his ex-wife continued to be represented by the law firm retained to prosecute…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Comden v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Chronometrics, Inc. v. Sysgen, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1980
  3. Abeles v. State BarCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Nalian Truck Lines, Inc. v. Nakano Warehouse & Transportation Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1992
  5. Bobele v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Snider v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  2. Myerchin v. Family Benefits, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2008
  3. HTC CORP. v. Technology Properties Ltd.District Court, N.D. California · 2010
  4. FREMONT INDEMNITY COMPANY v. Fremont General Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2006
  5. McMillan v. Shadow Ridge at Oak Park Homeowner's Assn.California Court of Appeal · 2008

5 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