MMR/Wallace Power & Industrial, Inc. v. Thames Associates

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that even where attorneys supplied affidavits stating that they had not received any confidential information, the possibility alone that privileged information had been released “threatens to taint the integrity of [the] case” and required disqualification
• disqualifying attorney who interviewed adversary’s former employee who, “in his role as trial consultant/paralegal ... had access not merely to confidential information regarding the [subject matter of the litigation], but also about the plaintiffs litigation strategy”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).