John M. Clinard v. C. Roger Blackwood

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court held that adequate screening procedures may rebut the presumption of shared confidences and avoid automatic vicarious disqualification of a law firm under Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 8, Canon 5, DR 5-105(D). The court nevertheless affirmed disqualification of the firm because the attorney's switch from representing the Blackwoods to joining the firm representing their adversaries in the same litigation created a serious appearance of impropriety.

Holdings

1. DR 5-105(D) does not require automatic vicarious disqualification of an attorney's law firm when the attorney has a former-client conflict. Adequate screening procedures may rebut the presumption that confidential information was shared with the attorney's new firm.
2. The Waller firm's screening procedures were sufficient to rebut the presumption that Davis and his secretary shared the Blackwoods' confidential information with the Waller attorneys representing the Clinards and American Limestone.
3. Even when screening effectively prevents actual sharing of confidences, a serious and objectively established appearance of impropriety may independently require vicarious disqualification. Because Davis's new firm represented the Blackwoods' adversary in the very litigation in which Davis had previously represented and obtained confidences from the Blackwoods, the appearance of impropriety required disqualification.

Questions Presented

1. Whether adequate screening procedures can rebut the presumption of shared confidences and prevent automatic vicarious disqualification of a law firm under Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 8, Canon 5, DR 5-105(D).
2. Whether the appearance of impropriety constitutes an independent basis for disqualifying a law firm even when screening procedures have effectively prevented the sharing of confidential information.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to apply the appearance-of-impropriety standard.

Disposition

affirmed