Legal Opinion
Spratley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Utah Supreme Court
Decided September 23, 2003No. 20011002, 20011003PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED OPINION
WILKINS, Justice:
T1 We granted this interlocutory appeal by plaintiffs Richard Spratley and Brett Pearce to review the trial court's December 7, 2001 order requiring Spratley and Pearce, attorneys who formerly represented State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company ("State Farm") and its insureds, to "refrain from disclosing" certain communications and facts relating to that representation, to return to State Farm documents that Spratley and Pearce retained from the representation, and disqualifying Spratley and Pearce's chosen legal counsel, L. Rich Humpherys, and his law…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Hull v. Celanese Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- Crews v. Buckman Laboratories International, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2002
- Zilisch v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceArizona Supreme Court · 2000
- GTE Products Corp. v. StewartMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
- Fox Searchlight Pictures, Inc. v. PaladinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Shaya B. Pacific, LLC v. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLPAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Hoffman v. Baltimore Police Dept.District Court, D. Maryland · 2005
- Nevada Yellow Cab Corp. v. Eighth Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 2007
- Coroles v. StateUtah Supreme Court · 2015
- Alexander v. Tandem Staffing SolutionsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.