14 Cited authorities

Matter of Priest v. Hennessy
51 N.Y.2d 62 (N.Y. 1980) Cited 370 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that no attorney-client relationship had been shown to exist between attorneys and third parties who had paid for the representation of certain of the attorneys' clients
Matter of Cooperman
83 N.Y.2d 465 (N.Y. 1994) Cited 206 times
Holding non-refundable retainers prohibited by Code of Professional Responsibility, applying provisions materially the same as Arizona's
People v. Gomberg
38 N.Y.2d 307 (N.Y. 1975) Cited 290 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Gomberg we required only that the court be "satisfied" that the waiver was informed (38 NY2d at 313); the actual task of informing the defendant as to the conflict, we indicated, was the ethical and representational obligation of counsel (id. at 314).
Greene v. Greene
47 N.Y.2d 447 (N.Y. 1979) Cited 225 times
In Greene, the firm representing the plaintiff had members that were former employees of the defendant and had the possibility of being held "jointly and severally [liable] for all tortious conduct" committed by the defendant.
Cardinale v. Golinello
43 N.Y.2d 288 (N.Y. 1977) Cited 221 times
Affirming disqualification of small firm characterized by cross current of discussion and ideas among all attorneys on all matters, and all firm files were open and available to all lawyers
GSI Commerce Solutions, Inc. v. BabyCenter, L.L.C.
618 F.3d 204 (2d Cir. 2010) Cited 80 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding that client and client's corporate affiliate were so interrelated such that "representation adverse to a client's corporate affiliate implicate[d] the duty of loyalty owed to the client"
Matter of Kelly
23 N.Y.2d 368 (N.Y. 1968) Cited 145 times
Upholding sanctions against members of two-partner law firm, where partners represented claimants against insurance carrier, though one of the partners worked as "outside adjuster" for that same carrier
Callahan v. Callahan
127 A.D.2d 298 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987) Cited 50 times
Explaining that a fraud claim may be based on the allegation that a fiduciary concealed material facts
Aoki v. Aoki
117 A.D.3d 499 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014) Cited 7 times
2014-05-13 In re Kevin AOKI, et al., Petitioners, v. Echo AOKI, et al., Respondents, Devon Aoki, et al., Respondents–Appellants, Keiko Ono Aoki, Respondent–Respondent. Pryor Cashman LLP, New York (David C. Rose of counsel), for appellants. Rosenberg Feldman Smith, LLP, New York (Richard B. Feldman of counsel), for Keiko Ono Aoki, respondent. SWEENY Pryor Cashman LLP, New York (David C. Rose of counsel), for appellants. Rosenberg Feldman Smith, LLP, New York (Richard B. Feldman of counsel), for Keiko
Gardine v. Cottey
360 Mo. 681 (Mo. 1950) Cited 87 times
In Gardine v. Cottey, 360 Mo. 681, 230 S.W.2d 731 (1950) (en banc), the wife was allowed to subsequently attack the property settlement agreement on the basis it was procured, inter alia, by fraud and misrepresentation.

In the Matter of Kevin Aoki, et al., Petitioners,v.Echo Aoki, et al., Respondents.---------------------------------Devon Aoki, et al. Respondents, Keiko Ono Aoki, Appellant.

14 Cited authorities

Holding that no attorney-client relationship had been shown to exist between attorneys and third parties who had paid for the representation of certain of the attorneys' clients

Holding non-refundable retainers prohibited by Code of Professional Responsibility, applying provisions materially the same as Arizona's

In Gomberg we required only that the court be "satisfied" that the waiver was informed (38 NY2d at 313); the actual task of informing the defendant as to the conflict, we indicated, was the ethical and representational obligation of counsel (id. at 314).

In Greene, the firm representing the plaintiff had members that were former employees of the defendant and had the possibility of being held "jointly and severally [liable] for all tortious conduct" committed by the defendant.

Affirming disqualification of small firm characterized by cross current of discussion and ideas among all attorneys on all matters, and all firm files were open and available to all lawyers

Finding that client and client's corporate affiliate were so interrelated such that "representation adverse to a client's corporate affiliate implicate[d] the duty of loyalty owed to the client"

Upholding sanctions against members of two-partner law firm, where partners represented claimants against insurance carrier, though one of the partners worked as "outside adjuster" for that same carrier

Explaining that a fraud claim may be based on the allegation that a fiduciary concealed material facts

In Gardine v. Cottey, 360 Mo. 681, 230 S.W.2d 731 (1950) (en banc), the wife was allowed to subsequently attack the property settlement agreement on the basis it was procured, inter alia, by fraud and misrepresentation.