Weadock v. Taha

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 2108
• 113 N.E.3d 1176

Syllabus

This appeal arises from the trial court's decision disqualifying Plaintiff-appellant's attorney from continuing to represent her in the pending litigation. The trial court, given the attorney's participation in a meeting – the details of which are contested – central to Plaintiff-appellant's spoliation cause of action, did not abuse its discretion when concluding that the attorney was a necessary witness under Prof.Cond.R. 3.7(a) and that the attorney's continued representation was otherwise inappropriate. Judgment affirmed.