ELR Citation: ELR 20940
No(s). 88 C 10734 (N.D. Ill. Apr 27, 1990)

The court holds that defendant's counsel suffers from a conflict-of-interest and disqualifies counsel from this hazardous waste case for learning privileged information while being interviewed as a potential replacement for plaintiff's outside counsel. Plaintiff had retained law firms from Chicago and Virginia. In seeking to replace the Chicago firm, plaintiff interviewed but did not retain the firm subsequently retained by defendant. During the interview, plaintiff discussed with defendant's counsel the status of the litigation, the facts, privileged communications with the Virgina firm, strategy, and what defendant was prepared to accept in settlement. The court holds that an implied attorney-client relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant's counsel because confidential information was divulged and plaintiff had a reasonable belief that an attorney-client relationship existed during the interview. The court holds that a substantial relationship exists between the prior representation of plaintiff and the present representation of defendant and that plaintiff could be prejudiced by the confidential information revealed to defendant's counsel. The court holds that the Chinese Wall defense can be used when an infected attorney joins the firm, but not where the attorneys were infected at the firm seeking to avoid disqualification.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Donald Egan
Katten, Muchin & Zavis
525 W. Monroe St., Ste. 1600, Chicago IL 60606-3693
(312) 902-5211

Counsel for Defendant
John D. Rice
Quantum Chemical Corp.
11500 North Lake Dr., Cincinnati OH 45249
(513) 530-6563