Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher has been disqualified from representing a limited partnership in a dispute with a private equity fund because at least one of its lawyers, while working at another firm, had drafted fund formation documents at issue in the suit.

Though that lawyer was not working on the present litigation, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Bernard Fried said the plaintiff had failed to meet an “especially heavy” burden to show the lawyer’s conflict of interest should not be imputed to Gibson Dunn in Casita, LP v. MapleWood Equity Partners (Offshore), Ltd., 603525/2005.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]