The moving parties brought a motion to remove the responding parties' counsel of record due to an alleged conflict of interest.
The moving parties argued that the law firm had previously acted for a jointly owned corporation and possessed confidential information relevant to the current shareholder dispute, specifically regarding a project called AllianceCare.
The court found that the law firm had a prior solicitor-client relationship with the jointly owned corporation and that the new retainer was sufficiently related to the past work, raising a rebuttable presumption of prejudice.
Because the responding parties refused to answer questions about AllianceCare during cross-examination, the court drew an adverse inference and found the presumption was not rebutted.
The motion was granted and the law firm was removed as counsel of record.
