In Re Appeal of Infotechnology, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a trial court has no authority to rule on ethical issues involving Delaware lawyers, because that subject falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Delaware Supreme Court
• concluding that nonclient litigant may move to disqualify opposing counsel, but must prove by clear and convincing evidence that conflict exists and that it will prejudice fairness of proceedings
• noting that the court “alone[] has sole responsibility for . . . enforcing the Rules of Professional Conduct”
• recognizing that an opposing party may only challenge the opposing party’s choice of representation if he or she can show by clear and convincing evidence that (1) the representation was inappropriate and (2) it affected the fair and efficient administration of justice
• describing appointment of counsel to serve as the Court’s “amicus curiae to present an independent position”
• “Recognizing the potential abuses of the Rules in litigation, we conclude that the burden of proof must be on the non-client litigant . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).