Scott v. Higginbotham’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 575 So. 2d 630 - State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. KAW · Graham v. Wyeth Laboratories · 730 So. 2d 289 - Koulisis v. Rivers · 745 So. 2d 510 - Gaton v. Health Coalition, Inc. · 725 So. 2d 431 - Pinebrook Towne House v. Ce O'Dell
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Former Clients of Newly Associated Lawyer. When a lawyer becomes associated with a firm, the firm may not knowingly represent a person in the same or a substantially related matter in which that lawyer, or a firm with which the lawyer was associated, had previously represented a client whose interests are materially adverse to that person and about whom the lawyer had acquired information protected by rules 4-1.6[ [2] ] and 4-1.9(b)[ [3] ] that is material to the matter.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Subdivisions (b) and (c) operate to disqualify the firm only when the lawyer involved has actual knowledge of information protected by rules 4-1.6 and 4-1.9(b). Thus, if a lawyer while with 1 firm acquired no knowledge or information relating to a particular client of the firm and that lawyer later joined another firm, neither the lawyer individually nor the second firm is disqualified from representing another client in the same or a related matter even though the interests of the 2 clients conflict.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[U]nder rule 4-1.10(b), in order to establish a prima facie case for disqualification, the moving party must show that the newly associated attorney acquired confidential information in the course of the attorney's prior representation. Gaton, 745 So.2d at 511 ; Koulisis, 730 So.2d at 292 . After the moving party meets this burden, the burden shifts to the firm whose disqualification is sought to show that the newly associated attorney has no knowledge of any material confidential information.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.