Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed February 1, 2023.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D22-0938
Lower Tribunal No. 04-11813
________________
The Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, etc.,
Appellant,
vs.
Birk Hillman Consultants, Inc., et al.,
Appellees.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-
Dade County, Reemberto Diaz, Judge.
White & Case LLP, and Raoul G. Cantero and James N. Robinson
and Ryan A. Ulloa and W. Dylan Fay, for appellant.
Law Office of Michael Garcia Petit, P.A., and Michael Garcia Petit
(Miramar), for appellee Brian Kuei Tung; Holland & Knight LLP, and
Rodolfo Sorondo, Jr., and Rebecca M. Plasencia, for appellee Steve
Ferguson.
Before HENDON, GORDO, and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Moriber v. Dreiling,
95 So. 3d 449, 453 (Fla. 3d DCA
2012) (“[T]he disqualification of counsel is left to the sound discretion of the
trial court, as long as such discretion is exercised within the confines of the
applicable law and the trial court’s express or implied findings are
supported by competent substantial evidence.”); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins.
Co. v. K.A.W.,
575 So. 2d 630, 634 (Fla. 1991) (recognizing the “irrefutable
presumption that confidences were disclosed” in cases involving a direct
conflict of interest with a former client and finding that actual proof of
prejudice is not a prerequisite for disqualification of party counsel due to
such a conflict); Gaton v. Health Coal., Inc.,
745 So. 2d 510, 511 (Fla. 3d
DCA 1999) (“After the moving party meets its burden of establishing a
prima facie case for disqualification . . . [t]he firm whose disqualification is
sought must then demonstrate that their new associate has no actual
knowledge of any confidential information material to the case. . . . The
affidavits submitted in support of the disqualification motion clearly state
that counsel for Gaton and Stiefel provided Lipton with ‘extensive
background on all aspects of the case,’ ‘mental impressions on the entire
matter,’ ‘strategies and how they impacted the future of the case,’ and
‘overall thoughts regarding liability, damages, and discovery of the case as
a whole.’ This was sufficient to meet their burden of proof.”).
2
