Brief Fact Summary. In the course of an action equivalent to a derivative suit against a union, appellants request that appellee’s law firm be disqualified on the grounds that it was previously retained as counsel for three of the individual officer-defendants.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. Attorneys may not represent plaintiffs in a derivative suit against a corporation if they have previously individually represented its officers in related matters.
Issue. Should Williams and Connolly be disqualified from further representation?
Held. Yes. Having already represented the officer-defendants in previous matters on an individual basis, the firm should not be allowed to continue representation of the union even after withdrawing its representation of the individual officers.
A line must be drawn between the use of the Journal to report the activities of defendant Boyle as President, which is permissible, and the use of the Journal, in such a way in reporting such activities, as to promote the candidacy of said defendant.View Full Point of Law