Musser v. Youngstown Orthopaedic Assn., Ltd.

Citations

• 2021 Ohio 4301

Syllabus

CIVIL – disqualification of counsel/law firm final appealable order conflict of interest former client other civil lawsuit interlocutory appeal YOA Operating Agreement Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.9(a) it is an obvious conflict of interest for an attorney/law firm to represent both sides involving the same matter without a waiver Dana test, three prongs first prong is not contested a past attorney-client relationship existed between the party seeking disqualification (Dr. Musser) and the attorney he wishes to disqualify (Attorney Thomas and the Firm) second prong \substantially related\ Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct, Rule 1.0(n) the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding a substantial relationship between the Firm's representation of Dr. Musser in the Other Case and its representation of YOA against Dr. Musser in the Present Case third prong presumption of shared confidences established the trial court was within its discretion in finding that the presumption was not properly rebutted by the Firm judgment affirmed.