Law Commons^™

The Former Client's Disqualification Gambit: A Bad Move In Pursuit Of An Ethical Anomaly, Steven H. Goldberg

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

This Article contends that the successive conflict and imputed disqualification rules in combination are both bad law and bad ethics and that a different approach would be better for clients, for the adversary system, and for the profession. Part I of the Article analyzes the development of the successive conflict and the imputed disqualification doctrines. It demonstrates that two different, not always consistent, theories caused the successive conflict disqualification principles to develop erratically, resulting in a set of rules incompatible with either supporting rationale. Part II explains why the incorporation of that set of rules into the Model Rules of …