Thanks to the "thrust upon" exception to the so-called "hot potato gambit," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled Thursday that Townsend and Townsend and Crew could not be disqualified from a patent case. The hot potato gambit, explains the Federal Circuit, is when a law firm creates a conflict so it can drop a smaller client for a bigger one. The exception is when the conflict could not have been foreseen by the law firm.
October 24, 2008 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
Thanks to the “thrust upon” exception to the so-called “hot potato gambit,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled Thursday that Townsend and Townsend and Crew could not be disqualified from a patent case (pdf).
The hot potato gambit, explains the Federal Circuit, is when a law firm creates a conflict so it can drop a smaller client for a bigger one. The exception is when the conflict could not have been foreseen by the law firm.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
