Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals court hears challenge to trial judge’s disqualification of counsel in closely held cannabis dispute
Summary
In an appeal over counsel disqualification in a suit between two co-owners of Canneberg Cultivation, attorneys debated whether conflicts under Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 1.7 justify disqualifying counsel without an evidentiary hearing; the court took the matter under advisement.
The Massachusetts Appeals Court on the oral-argument calendar heard competing views on whether a trial judge properly disqualified a lawyer from representing both a closely held cannabis company and one of its co-owners in a dispute between the company’s two sole owners. The case centers on whether the alleged competing interests of the two owners created an unwaivable concurrent conflict under Rule 1.7 of the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct and, if so, whether the trial court abused its discretion by ordering disqualification without an evidentiary hearing. Appellant counsel Robert Curtis, arguing for the disqualified lawyer’s client, said the record showed…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
