Naqvi v. Illinois Health and Science, et al
Filing
49
OPINION entered by U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins. Plaintiff's Motion to Disqualify Defense Counsel 36 and Defendants' Motion for a Protective Order 45 are set for an evidentiary hearing before this Court in U.S. District Courthouse, 600 E. Monroe Street, Springfield, Illinois in Courtroom III on Friday, January 12, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. before U.S. Magistrate Judge Schanzle-Haskins. See written order. (LB, ilcd)
E-FILED
Thursday, 30 November, 2017 03:49:09 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, SPRINGFIELD DIVISION
ALI NAQVI,
Plaintiff,
v.
ILLINOIS HEALTH AND
SCIENCE, et al,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 17-cv-3145
OPINION
TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS, U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE:
Pending before the Court are Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify Defense
Counsel (d/e 36) (Motion 36) filed by Plaintiff Ali Naqvi, and Defendants’
Motion for a Protective Order (d/e 45) (Motion 45) filed by Defendants
Illinois Health and Science (IHS); Decatur Memorial Hospital (DMH);
Zevacor Molecular; Zevacor Pharma, Inc. n/k/a Global Isotopes, LLC
(Pharma); Board of Directors of IHS; Board of Directors of DMH; Timothy
D. Stone, Jr; Roy Mosser; Ron Drane; and Robin King.
The resolution of these Motions turn on whether Naqvi previously
established an attorney-client relationship with the law firm representing
Defendants, Drinker, Biddle & Reath LLP (Firm). In August and
September 2015, Naqvi met with and sent at least one email to attorney
Page 1 of 3
Michael Robinson of the Firm, and met with attorney Quin R. Frazer of the
Firm and perhaps other members of the Firm. Naqvi was Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of Defendants IHS, DMH, and
Pharma at the time of these meetings and communications. See Amended
Complaint (d/e 32), ¶ 5. The parties dispute whether Naqvi met with
Robinson and Frazer in his personal capacity or in his capacity as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the three Defendant
entities. Compare Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion to
Disqualify Defense Counsel (d/e 37), Exhibit 1, Affidavit of Ali Naqvi, with
Defendants’ Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify
Defense Counsel (d/e 41) (Defendants’ Memorandum), Exhibit 1, Affidavit
of Michael D. Rosenbaum and Exhibit 2, Affidavit of Quin R. Frazer. The
Court requires an evidentiary hearing to resolve conflicts in the testimony of
Paqvi, Robinson, and Frazer.
The Court notes that attorneys Robinson and Frazer (or any other
attorney from the Firm other than the attorneys of record in this case) may
testify at the evidentiary hearing without affecting the ability of the attorneys
of record to continue representing the Defendants. Illinois Supreme Court
Rule of Professional Conduct (RPC) 3.7(b) states, “A lawyer may act as
advocate in a trial in which another lawyer in the lawyer’s firm is likely to be
Page 2 of 3
called as a witness unless precluded from doing so by Rule 1.7 or Rule
1.9.” (RPC) 3.7(b); See Local Rule 83.6(D) (This Court adopts the Illinois
Supreme Court Rule of Professional Conduct). Should the Court allow
Motion 36, the Court will disqualify the Firm because of the conflict of
interest, not because Robinson, Frazer, or any other attorney from the Firm
testified at the hearing on the Motions. Should the Court deny Motion 36,
the fact that Robinson, Frazer, or another attorney (besides the attorneys of
record) testified would not affect the ability of the attorneys of record to
continue representing the Defendants. RPC 3.7.
THEREFORE, Plaintiff’s Motion to Disqualify Defense Counsel (d/e
36) and Defendants’ Motion for a Protective Order (d/e 45) are set for an
evidentiary hearing before this Court in U.S. District Courthouse 600 E.
Monroe Street, Springfield, Illinois in Courtroom III on Friday, January 12,
2018, at 10:00 a.m. before U.S. Magistrate Judge Tom Schanzle-Haskins.
ENTER: November 30, 2017
s/ Tom Schanzle-Haskins
TOM SCHANZLE-HASKINS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 3 of 3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?