SST Castings, Inc. v. Amana Appliances, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• denying disqualification motion because it would be “patently unfair” to deprive client of attorney of three years
• explaining “Ohio courts have held that a litigant’s right to ‘select counsel of choice should be limited only when representation poses a significant risk of a violation of the Canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility’”
• “The Dana substantially-related test is not applicable where an attorney undertakes employment against a current client.”
• “a violation of the rules of professional ethics does not automatically necessitate disqualification of an attorney”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).