American Can Company v. Citrus Feed Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that “new partners of a vicariously disqualified partner[] to whom knowledge has been imputed during a former partnership ... need show only that the vicariously disqualified partner’s knowledge was imputed, not actual”
• speaking of former Canons 6 and 37, the predecessors of Canon 4
• knowledge of one member of a law firm, imputed to another member of the firm, will not be reimputed to members of an associating firm
• the movants “alleged but did not prove that confidential disclosures made to [former counsel] were substantially related to” the present matter
• “[Liability to disqualification extends to partners and employees, and former partners and employees, of th[e] lawyer who participated in the attorney-client relationship.”
• disqualification order reversed as contrary to prevailing ethical principles

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).