Legal Opinion
Strasbourger Pearson Tulcin Wolff Inc. v. Wiz Technology, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 16, 1999No. G021136PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WALLIN, J.
Strasbourger Pearson Tulcin Wolff Inc., Michael J. Schumacher, and Allan M. Levine (collectively Strasbourger) appeal the order disqualifying Stroock & Stroock & Lavan and Michael F. Perils, a member of the firm (collectively Stroock), from representing Strasbourger in the action below, claiming the trial court abused its discretion because: (1) Stroock’s representation caused, at most, the mere appearance of impropriety; (2) Stroock represented Strasbourger, the underwriter in Wiz Technology, Inc.’s (Wiz) stock offering, and never represented Wiz; (3) even if Stroock…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Couch v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- United States v. Arthur Young & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- In Re Complex Asbestos LitigationCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- River West, Inc. v. NickelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Clark v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- GREAT LAKES CONSTRUCTION, INC. v. BurmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
- Koo v. Rubio's Restaurants, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2003
- DCH Health Services Corp. v. WaiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002
- Salehi v. Surfside III Condominium Owners Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.