Thomas Bostic and Diane Douglas-Quick v. United States of America

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York granted the United States’ motion to disqualify Harris Keenan & Goldfarb PLLC from representing both plaintiffs in a Federal Tort Claims Act action arising from a vehicle collision. The court held that concurrent representation of the driver and passenger created a prima facie conflict that could not be overcome by the plaintiffs’ friendship, litigation posture, or asserted lack of prejudice.

Holdings

1. Concurrent representation of the driver and passenger is prima facie improper because the passenger may need advice concerning claims against, or investigation of, the driver, while the driver's representation requires minimizing liability to all claimants.
2. Those circumstances do not overcome the heavy burden required to defeat disqualification because the potential conflict exists whether or not the passenger has already asserted a claim against the driver.
3. Disqualification was warranted despite the late stage of the litigation because protecting the integrity of the adversary process outweighed the short-term delay and prejudice associated with obtaining new counsel.

Questions Presented

1. Whether counsel's concurrent representation of the driver and passenger involved in the same automobile accident was prima facie improper because their interests were potentially adverse.
2. Whether the plaintiffs' testimony attributing fault to the USPS driver, their decision not to assert a cross-claim, their friendship, and the late stage of the litigation overcame the heavy burden required to defeat disqualification.
3. Whether the court should disqualify counsel from representing either plaintiff to preserve the integrity of the adversary process.

Disposition

other