Commonwealth Insurance v. Stone Container Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that because matters were “completely unrelated,” likelihood that attorney-expert had learned any information that could be used to adverse party’s disadvantage was “extremely remote”
• noting that, “[w]hen a lawyer is engaged as a testifying expert, that lawyer is not being asked to perform the traditional role of a lawyer in providing legal advice”
• because matters were “completely unrelated,” likelihood that attorney-expert had learned any information that could be used to adverse party’s disadvantage was “extremely remote”
• “The problem with [the defendant’s] position (and it is a significant one) is that the undisputed facts of this case do not support a finding of conflict.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).