in Re Chad Allen Bell ( 2013 )

In The
Court of Appeals
Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont
____________________
NO. 09-13-00450-CV
____________________
IN RE CHAD ALLEN BELL
_______________________________________________________ ______________
Original Proceeding
________________________________________________________ _____________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In a petition for writ of mandamus, Chad Allen Bell seeks to compel the trial
court to vacate its order of September 17, 2013, which denied Bell’s motion to
disqualify counsel for the real parties in interest, Jeffrey Durham and Pamela
Durham. Bell seeks an order from us requiring the trial court to disqualify counsel
for the Durhams. The parties dispute whether a disqualification occurs when an
associate, who never participated on a case where his employer represented the
defendant, accepts employment by another firm that represents the plaintiff. After
considering evidence, the trial court concluded that the associate’s change of
employment did not disqualify the associate’s new firm from representing the
1
Durhams. After reviewing the mandamus petition and record, we conclude relator
has not established an abuse of discretion by the trial court. See In re Guar. Ins.
Servs., Inc., 343 S.W.3d 130, 133-34 (Tex. 2011); Henderson v. Floyd, 891
S.W.2d 252 (Tex. 1995). Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus and
motion for temporary relief are denied.
PETITION DENIED.
PER CURIAM
Opinion Delivered October 24, 2013
Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
2