DeMartini, et al. v. DeMartini, et al.

Filing 98

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/1/2015 ORDERING 87 that Defendants' Motion to disqualify counsel is DENIED. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

TIMOTHY DEMARTINI, et al.,

12

Plaintiffs,

13
14

No. 2:14-cv-2722 JAM CKD PS

v.

ORDER

MICHAEL DEMARTINI, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Pending before the court is defendants’ motion for disqualification of counsel. The matter

17
18

was submitted on the papers. Upon review of the documents in support and opposition, THE

19

COURT FINDS AS FOLLOWS:

20

Defendants move to disqualify plaintiffs’ counsel on the grounds that plaintiffs’ counsel

21

are potential witnesses in this case and that plaintiffs’ counsel should be presumed to be tainted

22

because they have acted as co-counsel with Susan McGuire. Defendants’ contentions are

23

meritless. The court finds no basis for disqualification of plaintiffs’ counsel. See California Rule

24

of Professional Conduct 5-210 (Member as Witness); Local Rule 180(e) (“Rules of Professional

25

Conduct of the State Bar of California adopted as standards of professional conduct in this Court);

26

see also Optyl Eyewear Fashion Int’l Corp. v. Style Companies, Ltd., 760 F.2d 1045, 1050 (9th

27

Cir. 1985) (disqualification motions subjected to “particularly strict judicial scrutiny”).

28

/////
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to disqualify counsel (ECF No.

2

87) is denied.

3

Dated: December 1, 2015

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

4
5
6
7
8
9

4 demartini2722.disq

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2