From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schneider v. Saiber Schlesinger Satz & Goldstein, L. L. C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 29, 1999
260 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

April 29, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Huff, J.).


The writing plaintiff signed constituted a clear and effective waiver of any right he might otherwise have had to claim the conflict of interest he now asserts ( see, Yasuda Trust Banking Co. v. 250 Church Assocs., 206 A.D.2d 259). Moreover, we agree with the IAS Court that, quite apart from this waiver, disqualification should be denied for failure to show the nature and substance of the confidential information plaintiff imparted to the attorneys, and its bearing on the arbitration proceeding ( see, supra). There is no merit to plaintiff's argument that the attorneys are simultaneously representing parties with conflicting interests in the arbitration.

Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Lerner, Mazzarelli and Friedman, JJ.


Summaries of

Schneider v. Saiber Schlesinger Satz & Goldstein, L. L. C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 29, 1999
260 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Schneider v. Saiber Schlesinger Satz & Goldstein, L. L. C.

Case Details

Full title:DONALD F. SCHNEIDER, Appellant, v. SAIBER SCHLESINGER SATZ GOLDSTEIN, L…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 29, 1999

Citations

260 A.D.2d 321 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
689 N.Y.S.2d 66

Citing Cases

Schertz v. Jenkins

"While a movant need not actually spell out the claimed secrets and confidences in order to prevail, it must…

Schertz v. Jenkins

"While a movant need not actually spell out the claimed secrets and confidences in order to prevail, it must…