California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Castro v. Los Angeles County Bd. of Supervisors, 232 Cal.App.3d 1432, 284 Cal.Rptr. 154 (Cal. App. 1991):
Fourth, concerning possible pressures arising during review of two DCLS counsel's work after a case is closed, disinclination to pursue a costly appeal, or reluctance to charge an opposing counsel with unethical conduct, the very language plaintiffs' brief on appeal uses in raising these points reveals their hypothetical nature. "[T]he attorney might be unwilling to take a certain litigation position ..."; " ... one can easily imagine a scenario where ..."; "A staff attorney might also be disinclined to pursue a costly appeal if...." Speculative contentions of conflict of interest cannot justify disqualification of counsel. (Kain v. Municipal Court (1982) 130 Cal.App.3d 499, 504, 181 Cal.Rptr. 751.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.