Skip to main content
Texas Supreme Court· 12/17/2004

In Re Sanders

Citations

  • 153 S.W.3d 54
  • 48 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 201
  • 2004 Tex. LEXIS 1365
  • 2004 WL 2913697

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 movant’s failure to explain why other sources were insufficient resulted in a failure to show the necessity of the attorney’s testimony
  • holding that disqualification is appropriate if “a lawyer’s testimony is necessary to establish an essential fact.”
  • holding that a movant’s failure to explain why other sources were insufficient resulted in a failure to show the necessity of the attorney’s testimony
  • holding that the movant failed to establish that an attorney’s testimony was necessary to establish details in the husband’s employment schedule when the information was reflected in the record
  • recognizing that disqualification of an attorney is appropriate if the attorney is a material witness and his testimony is “necessary to establish an essential fact” and/or that the attorney’s “dual role” as attorney and witness would otherwise prejudice the opposing party
  • observing that disqualification causes immediate harm ―by depriving a party of its chosen counsel and disrupting court proceedings‖

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

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.