Weissman v. Birn

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a per se disqualification rule “conflicts with public policies favoring client choice and restricts an attorney’s ability to practice” (citation omitted)
• “[S]uch ‘side switching’ clearly implicates the policies both of maintaining loyalty to the first client and of protecting that client’s confidences.”
• the operative questions include whether “significant client confidences were acquired by the disqualified attorney”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).