DocketNumber: No. FA99-0154059S
Citation Numbers: 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 3618
Judges: LEHENY, JUDGE.
Filed Date: 3/30/2000
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
The court heard testimony from the defendant and Attorney Irving Perlmutter with regard to these transactions. The issue regarding disposition of the real property is contested. The court finds that Attorney Perlmutter's law firm is in possession of the files concerning the purchase and financing of the marital property. As such, it is privy to information regarding the defendant's financial affairs. Attorney Perlmutter could not recall the information in these files.
Rule 1.9(2) of the Professional Rules of Conduct states:
A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:
(1) Represent another person in the same or a substantially related manner in which that person's interests are materially adverse to the interests of the former client unless the former client consents after consultation; or
(2) Use information relating to the representation to CT Page 3619 the disadvantage of the former client except as rule 1.6 would permit with respect to a former client or when the information has become generally known.
The fact that Attorney Perlmutter does not recall the contents of the real estate files leaves open the possibility that information disadvantageous to Mrs. Hermes could be in the file. As a result, the lawyers in Attorney Perlmutter's firm are similarly disqualified pursuant to Rule 10(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. That rule states:
(a) While lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited by Rules 1.7, 1.8(c), 1.9 or 2.2.
For the foregoing reasons, the court grants the motion to disqualify Attorney Perlmutter and the members of his law firm.
SANDRA VILARDI LEHENY, J.