Brennan et al v. Brennan et al

Filing 113

ORDER denying for lack of jurisdiction 95 Motion to Disqualify Stone Pigman as Counsel. FURTHER ORDER that all other relief sought by defendants in theirmotion to disqualify, including the request for attorneys fees and costs and the request that Stone Pigman be found in contempt, are DENIED for lack of jurisdiction. Signed by Judge Susie Morgan on 6/12/2013. (tsf)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
THEODORE BRENNAN, et al.,
Plaintiffs

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

No. 13-2491

OWEN E. BRENNAN, et al.,
Defendants

SECTION “E”
ORDER

Before the Court is defendants’ motion to disqualify the law firm of Stone Pigman
Walther Wittmann, LLC (“Stone Pigman”) as counsel for plaintiffs Theodore Brennan
(“Ted”) and Bridget Brennan Tyrrell (“Bridget”) in any litigation pending in state and/or
federal court directly or indirectly involving their status as officers, directors, and/or
shareholders of Brennan’s, Inc. and other related relief.1 Ted and Bridget oppose the
motion.2
On May 6, 2013, the Court disqualified Stone Pigman as counsel for Brennan's, Inc.
in the above-captioned case and “any matter consolidated herewith.”3 On May 31, 2013, the
Court issued an order clarifying the May 6, 2013 Order and holding that Stone Pigman is
disqualified “from representing Brennan’s, Inc., directly or indirectly, in any action pending
in state or federal court, whether that action involves a dispute among shareholders of the
corporation or other disputes.”4 On June 6, 2013, the Fifth Circuit granted in part and

1

R. Doc. 95.

2

R. Doc. 111.

3

Civil Action No. 13-2491, R. Doc. 30.

4

See Civil Action 13-2491, R. Doc. 92; see also Civil Action No. 13-2491, R. Doc. 86.

1

denied in part a petition for Writ of Mandamus filed by Brennan’s, Inc., Ted, and Bridget.
The Fifth Circuit denied the petition with respect to Civil Action No. 12-2442 and Civil
Action No. 13-2491 and granted the petition with respect to all other state and federal cases.
On June 7, 2013, the Fifth Circuit directed this Court to vacate the disqualification orders
as to those other cases.5 At the Fifth Circuit’s direction, on June 11, 2013, the Court vacated
its orders disqualifying Stone Pigman as counsel for Brennan's, Inc. “as to all state and
federal cases other than Civil Action No. 12-2442 and Civil Action No. 13-2491” but
reiterated that the “the Court's orders disqualifying Stone Pigman from representing
Brennan's, Inc. in Civil Action No. 12-2442 and Civil Action No. 13-2491 remain in full force
and effect.”6
Defendants motion to disqualify Stone Pigman as counsel for Ted and Bridget was
filed in Civil Action No. 13-2491. The Court has entered final judgment in this case,7 and
that judgment is now on appeal.8 The Court’s disqualification orders are part of that
appeal. The Court does not have jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by defendants in the
instant motion.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that defendants’ motion to disqualify Stone Pigman
as counsel for Ted and Bridget be and hereby is DENIED for lack of jurisdiction.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other relief sought by defendants in their
motion to disqualify, including the request for attorney’s fees and costs and the request that
5

R. Doc. 110.

6

R. Doc. 112.

7

See R. Doc. 74 (Judgment); R. Doc. 106 (Amended Judgment).

8

See R. Doc. 108 (Notice of Appeal by Brennan’s, Inc.); R. Doc. 109 (Notice of Appeal by Ted and

Bridget).

2

Stone Pigman be found in contempt, be and hereby are DENIED for lack of jurisdiction.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this ___ day of June, 2013.
_____________________________
SUSIE MORGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3