WE Bassett Company v. HC Cook Company
| Decision Date | 09 May 1962 |
| Docket Number | Docket 27389.,No. 336,336 |
| Citation | 302 F.2d 268 |
| Parties | The W. E. BASSETT COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The H. C. COOK COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee, Lighter Corporation of America, Britton Manufacturing Company and Ernest C. Britton, Defendants. John B. CUNINGHAM, Respondent-Appellant, v. The H. C. COOK COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Samuel A. Persky, New Haven, Conn. (Mandeville Mullally, Stewart W. Richards, Roy C. Hopgood, New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.
Patterson, Belknap & Webb, New York City (Richard G. Moser, Robert P. Patterson, Jr., Craig B. Bright, Peter D. Junger, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellee.
Stewart W. Richards, New York City, for respondent-appellant.
Before WATERMAN, MOORE and FRIENDLY, Circuit Judges.
This appeal has been taken from an order entered below on the court's own motion disqualifying one of plaintiff's attorneys while trial was in progress. The trial judge filed a written opinion, to which reference may be had, in which he found that though no actual improprieties had thus far occurred and that all adversary counsel had thus far acted with scrupulous regard of professional duties, responsibilities and ethics, "Circumstances have now been created which, with Mr. Cuningham remaining in the case, will inevitably lead to suspicion and distrust in the minds of the defendant and the opportunity for misunderstanding on the part of the public which will lead to a lack of confidence in the bar."
We have reviewed the circumstances that caused the order of disqualification to be entered, and we agree with the court below.
Order of disqualification affirmed, D.C., 201 F.Supp. 821.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Armstrong v. McAlpin
...a motion to disqualify were generally held to be appealable, albeit without much discussion. See, e. g., W. E. Basset Co. v. H. C. Cook Co., 302 F.2d 268 (2d Cir. 1962) (per curiam). The rationale was stated to be that "(a)n order granting disqualification seriously disrupts the progress of......
-
United Nuclear Corp. v. General Atomic Co.
... ... GENERAL ATOMIC COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant, ... Indiana & Michigan Electric Co., ... v. Patentex, Inc., supra, 478 F.2d at 574; W.E. Bassett Company v. H.C. Cook Company, 201 F.Supp. 821, 825 (D. Conn. 1961), aff'd ... ...
-
Cobb Publishing, Inc. v. Hearst Corp., 93-CV-71771-DT.
... ... The case was assigned to Chief Judge Julian Abele Cook, Jr ... On August 22, 1994, Plaintiff Cobb filed a ... A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ... 150 WEST JEFFERSON, SUITE 2500 ... DETROIT, MICHIGAN 48226 ... Celanese Corp, 513 F.2d 568 (C.A.2 1975); W.E. Bassett Co v. H.C. Cook Co, 201 F.Supp. 821 (D.C.Conn.1961), aff'd. per curiam, ... ...
-
Clinard v Blackwood
... ... According to Mr. Blackwood, American Limestone Company, Inc. ("American Limestone") moderated the blasting and performed some ... See W.E. Bassett Co. v. H.C. Cook Co., 201 F. Supp. 821, 824-25 (D. Conn.), aff'd per ... ...