Comden v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CLARK, J.
Doris Day Comden and Barry Comden seek mandate to compel respondent court to vacate its order requiring petitioners’ attorneys to withdraw from their representation of petitioners in an action for injunctive relief and breach of contract. The question presented is whether respondent court abused its discretion in ordering withdrawal pursuant to California Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 2-111 (A)(4) when the court concluded that a member of the attorneys’ *911firm ought to be called as a witness for plaintiffs at trial of the cause.1 We conclude the court acted within its…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- People v. Superior Court (Greer)California Supreme Court · 1977
- 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
- Wutchumna Water Co. v. BaileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Emle Industries, Inc. v. Patentex, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
- U. S. Ex Rel. Sheldon Electric Co. v. Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1976
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by119 opinions
- People v. PriceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- People v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
- S & S Hotel Ventures Limited Partnership v. 777 S. H. Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Alfred B. Freeman v. Chicago Musical Instrument Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1982
- People Ex Rel. Deparment of Corporations. v. Speedee Oil Change Systems, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1999
114 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.