Texas Supreme Court· 12/31/1998

In Re Epic Holdings, Inc.

Citations

985 S.W.2d 41
42 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 235
1998 Tex. LEXIS 162
1999 WL 2518

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that the delay in filing the motion to disqualify was not prejudicial because “almost no discovery” had been conducted at the time of filing
concluding that an appeal of a ruling on attorney disqualification does not adequately remedy the injury suffered by the party whose counsel was disqualified
holding that trial court had clearly abused its discretion in declining to disqualify a civil law firm that had represented the defendant in a matter whose claims were \substantially related\ to those in the pending lawsuit
holding that trial court had clearly abused its discretion in declining to disqualify a civil law firm that had represented the defendant in a matter whose claims were \substantially related\ to those in the pending lawsuit
“Members of a law firm cannot disavow access to confidential information of any one attorney’s client.”
“We have repeatedly observed that 'the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct do not determine whether counsel is disqualified in litigation, but they do provide guidelines and suggest the relevant considerations’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hecht, Phillips, Owen, Abbott, Davis, Ables, Baker, Gonzalez, Spector, Enoch, Hankinson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

163 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.