Sinckler v. Mohammed

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed orders disqualifying plaintiff's attorney and law firm from representing Geoffrey Sinckler in two property-related actions against Ibrahim Mohammed. The court held that Mohammed established a prior attorney-client relationship with the attorney, substantial relatedness between the representations, and materially adverse interests warranting disqualification.

Holdings

1. The court properly exercised its discretion in disqualifying Steve Okenwa and the Okenwa Law Firm because Mohammed established a prior attorney-client relationship with Okenwa, substantial relatedness between the prior and current representations, and material adversity between Mohammed's and Sinckler's interests.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Supreme Court properly disqualified Steve Okenwa and the Okenwa Law Firm from representing Sinckler where Okenwa previously represented Mohammed, the matters were substantially related, and the parties' interests were materially adverse.

Disposition

affirmed