United States v. Patrick J. Cunningham and John J. Sweeney

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that a client’s “counsel may not be examined as to communications from [the client] and may not be examined as to facts he learned only from such confidential communications”
• denying motion to disqualify in the absence of a motion by former client, explicitly distinguishing Ostrer; motion based on attorney’s prior representation of a prospective Government witness
• reversing district court decision disqualifying counsel solely at the behest of the government, not the counsel's former client, who was the source of the alleged conflict
• finding a Sixth Amendment violation in attorney’s disqualifica- tion because the defendant agreed to limit his attorney’s cross-examination of the witness whose testimony gave rise to the conflict
• interest in retaining counsel is “particularly strong” where counsel represented defendant for over six years and in numerous proceedings
• distinguishing between civil and criminal cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).