Legal Opinion
Fulfree v. Manchester
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 26, 1996No. 95 Civ. 7723 (DC)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
CHIN, District Judge. ,
Plaintiff Ellen Fulfree brings this ease against defendants Robert Manchester and Manchester Law Offices for malpractice and fraud in connection with defendants’ handling of a personal injury action previously brought by plaintiff against the manufacturer of Daikon Shield IUD’s. Defendants now move to disqualify Richard Fulfree, Esq., plaintiffs husband and attorney, from representing her in this action. Defendants’ motion is granted. Because Mr. Fulfree undoubtedly will be a material witness in this action, both as to liability and damages, he is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- S & S Hotel Ventures Limited Partnership v. 777 S. H. Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,328 J. P. Foley & Co., Inc. v. Oliver D. Vanderbilt, Arthur Young & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- Stratavest Ltd. v. RogersDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1995
- Munk v. Goldome National Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1988
- Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk A/SDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
3Cited by5 opinions
- Shabbir v. Pakistan International AirlinesDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2005
- United States v. LocascioDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2004
- United States v. Tate & Lyle North American Sugars, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2002
- Doe v. Polise Consulting Engineers, D.P.C.District Court, S.D. New York · 2021
- Edward B. Hubbuch v. J&M Realty Services Corp., et al.District Court, S.D. New York · 2026