Conflict Of Interest

2,287 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 195 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Sutton
  794 F.2d 1415· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-22 ·cited 58×
  The court held that dual representation did not violate the Sixth Amendment and that the plea agreement was not breached. The court also held that the investigatory stop was justified by founded suspicion and that severance was not warranted.
• Hatch v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n
  654 F.2d 825· D.C. Cir.· 1981-06-26 ·cited 58×
  The court held that while the Commission may adopt a stricter standard for interlocking directorships, it must provide a reasoned explanation for changing its precedent and give affected parties adequate notice and opportunity to meet the new standard.
• United States v. Barrett
  505 F.2d 1091· 7th Cir.· 1974-11-08 ·cited 58×
  The court held that several errors occurred during the trial, including improper joinder of offenses, erroneous exclusion of documentary evidence, and prejudicial comments by the trial judge, which cumulatively prejudiced the defendant and warranted a new trial.
• United States v. Cochran
  499 F.2d 380· 5th Cir.· 1974-08-23 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the defendants' claims of prosecutorial misconduct, improper refusal to sever, and evidentiary errors were without merit, and affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Sweig
  441 F.2d 114· 2d Cir.· 1971-04-14 ·cited 58×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to infer the defendant's knowledge of the falsity of his statements for a perjury conviction and that the joinder of conspiracy and perjury counts was proper.
• Kaplan v. United States
  375 F.2d 895· 9th Cir.· 1967-03-01 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the defendants were not denied effective assistance of counsel, that the trial court properly examined Jencks Act statements, that the denial of motions to suppress and for discovery was correct, and that admissions made before arrest were admissible.
• McCORD v. Bailey
  636 F.2d 606· D.C. Cir.· 1980-09-09 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the doctrine of collateral estoppel should not be applied rigidly, and that equitable considerations in unusual circumstances may warrant allowing a party to pursue claims previously foreclosed.
• The Oglala Sioux Tribe OF Indians v. Andrus
  603 F.2d 707· 8th Cir.· 1979-07-27 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the Bureau of Indian Affairs' (BIA) decision to transfer Anthony Whirlwind Horse was arbitrary and capricious, violating the Indian Reorganization Act and the BIA's own consultation policy. The court reversed the district court's denial of injunctive and decla
• Messelt v. State OF Ala.
  595 F.2d 247· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-17 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the attorney's egregious conduct, including suggesting reindictment for leverage and proposing participation in a drug scheme, violated the petitioner's due process rights and rendered his trials fundamentally unfair.
• United States v. Carrigan
  543 F.2d 1053· 2d Cir.· 1976-11-03 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions must be reversed because their representation by the same attorney created a conflict of interest, violating their Sixth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Wisniewski
  478 F.2d 274· 2d Cir.· 1973-04-03 ·cited 57×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that probable cause existed for arrests, evidence was sufficient to prove participation and knowledge, and joint representation did not deny effective assistance of counsel due to repeated inquiries and assurances.
• Roberts v. State
  670 So. 2d 1042· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-03-13 ·cited 56×
  Brian Roberts was convicted by guilty plea to multiple serious felonies and moved to withdraw his plea before sentencing, alleging coercion by his court-appointed counsel. The court reversed the denial of both counsel's motion to withdraw and the defendant's motion to withdraw hi
• Walberg v. Israel
  766 F.2d 1071· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-01 ·cited 56×
  The dissenting judge believes the petitioner failed to prove denial of effective assistance of counsel, and that state court findings of fact should be presumed correct.
• Sullivan v. State
  441 So. 2d 609· Fla.· 1983-11-21 ·cited 56×
  Robert Sullivan, convicted of murder and sentenced to death in 1973, appeals the trial court's denial of his second Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief and seeks various forms of habeas relief. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the denial of his motion and rejects his ha
• THE Florida BAR v. Bern
  425 So. 2d 526· Fla.· 1982-12-09 ·cited 56×
  The Florida Bar disciplined attorney Joseph Bern for violations arising from a business partnership with his client Mrs. Warner while simultaneously serving as her attorney. The court found multiple breaches of fiduciary duty and professional responsibility rules, including confl
• Int'l Bus. Machs. Corp. v. Levin
  579 F.2d 271· 3d Cir.· 1978-06-19 ·cited 56×
  The court held that an attorney's adversary posture toward a client in one matter can adversely affect their independent judgment in another, even if unrelated, requiring disclosure and consent under DR 5-105. The court affirmed the disqualification but remanded the issue of work
• In re Investigation Before the April 1975 Grand Jury. Appeal of Sol Z. Rosen & Local 6 of The Newspaper & Graphic Commc'n Union
  531 F.2d 600· D.C. Cir.· 1976-02-03 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the District Court lacked sufficient grounds to order separate counsel for grand jury witnesses and vacated the order.
• Cinema 5, Ltd. v. Cinerama, Inc.
  528 F.2d 1384· 2d Cir.· 1976-01-27 ·cited 56×
  An attorney's duty of undivided loyalty to a current client prohibits representation adverse to that client, even if the matters are unrelated, to avoid the appearance of impropriety.
• United States v. Deutsch
  451 F.2d 98· 2d Cir.· 1971-09-21 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the "acting as agent" phrase in § 17(e)(1) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 does not require proof that the compensation received actually influenced the affiliated person's actions.
• Mills v. Singletary
  161 F.3d 1273· 11th Cir.· 1998-12-01 ·cited 55×
  Gregory Mills was convicted of first-degree felony murder, burglary, and aggravated battery in the 1979 shooting death of James Wright during a burglary. The jury recommended life imprisonment, but the trial judge overrode that recommendation and imposed a death sentence based on
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Zepp
  748 F.2d 125· 3d Cir.· 1984-11-13 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the attorney's stipulation, which prejudiced the client's defense and potentially inferred guilt, constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, requiring a new trial.
• Donovan v. Mazzola
  716 F.2d 1226· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-23 ·cited 55×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgments finding the trustees breached their fiduciary duties under ERISA and holding them in contempt for failing to post an indemnity bond.
• United Retail & Wholesale Emps. Teamsters Union Local NO. 115 Pension Plan & Robert E. Zimmer v. Yahn & Mc Donnell
  787 F.2d 128· 3d Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 54×
  The dissenting judge argues that the presumption of correctness for plan trustees' determinations of withdrawal liability in arbitration does not violate due process.
• Sullivan v. Cuyler
  723 F.2d 1077· 3d Cir.· 1983-12-08 ·cited 54×
• United States v. Bronston
  658 F.2d 920· 2d Cir.· 1981-08-19 ·cited 54×
  The dissenting judge argues that prejudicial errors occurred during the trial, denying the defendant a fair trial.
• Chadwick Willacy v. State
  967 So. 2d 131· Fla.· 2007-06-28 ·cited 53×
  Chadwick Willacy, convicted and sentenced to death for the brutal murder of his neighbor Marlys Sather in 1990, appealed the denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. The Florida Supre
• Rutherford v. State
  926 So. 2d 1100· Fla.· 2006-01-27 ·cited 52×
  Arthur Dennis Rutherford, a death row inmate with an active death warrant, appealed the circuit court's denial of his successive postconviction motion for relief, raising five claims including newly discovered evidence about witness Mary Heaton's potential involvement in the murd
• Fin. Gen. Bankshares, Inc. v. Metzger
  680 F.2d 768· D.C. Cir.· 1982-05-18 ·cited 52×
  A federal court abuses its discretion by retaining pendent jurisdiction over novel and unsettled questions of local law after the federal claims have been dismissed, even if judicial economy would otherwise favor retention.
• McKEE v. Harris
  649 F.2d 927· 2d Cir.· 1981-05-28 ·cited 52×
  The dissenting judge holds that the trial court erred by failing to inquire into the defendant's asserted good cause for substitution of counsel, thereby violating the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. FOX
  613 F.2d 99· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-06 ·cited 52×·via Actual Conflict Of Interest
  The court held that the trial court properly admitted evidence and that the defendants were not denied effective assistance of counsel due to joint representation.
• Int'l Elecs. Corp. & Electro Motive Corp. v. Flanzer
  527 F.2d 1288· 2d Cir.· 1975-12-22 ·cited 52×
  A law firm should not be disqualified from representing a former partner who is a party defendant, even if he will be a witness, as the rationales for the lawyer-witness rule do not apply. The court also affirmed the denial of a motion to disqualify opposing counsel.
• Goforth v. United States
  314 F.2d 868· 10th Cir.· 1963-02-04 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel, as the trial was not a mockery and the appellant bore responsibility for the circumstances leading to late counsel appointment.
• Craig v. United States
  217 F.2d 355· 6th Cir.· 1954-12-06 ·cited 52×
  The court held that a conflict of interest on the part of counsel, even if not intentionally created by the court or prosecution, can deprive a defendant of their Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, and such a right is not waived if the waiver is not intelli
• Crisp v. Duckworth
  743 F.2d 580· 7th Cir.· 1984-09-14 ·cited 51×
  The court held that while the attorney's performance may not have met an objective standard of reasonableness, his errors and omissions did not prejudice the defendant's trial outcome to the extent required for habeas corpus relief.
• In re Grand Jury Proceedings Involving Berkley & Co., Inc.
  629 F.2d 548· 8th Cir.· 1980-08-27 ·cited 51×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the district court's order compelling disclosure of documents claimed to be privileged, and affirmed the order subject to qualifications.
• In re Grand Jury Subpoena Directing Edward Taylor to Appear & Testify Before a Grand Jury on July 20
  567 F.2d 1183· 2d Cir.· 1977-12-12 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the district court's order disqualifying counsel based on an in camera review of grand jury materials was premature and violated the appellant's constitutional right to counsel of his choice.
• Kormondy v. State
  983 So. 2d 418· Fla.· 2007-10-11 ·cited 50×·via Actual Conflict Of Interest
  Johnny Shane Kormondy appeals the circuit court's denial of his Rule 3.851 motion for postconviction relief and files a habeas corpus petition in this capital murder case where he was sentenced to death in 1994 for murdering Gary McAdams during a home invasion robbery. The Florid
• Chandler v. Dugger
  634 So. 2d 1066· Fla.· 1994-02-24 ·cited 50×
  Jim Eric Chandler, a death row inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus relief and appealed the denial of his postconviction motion, raising multiple claims of trial and appellate error and ineffective assistance of counsel. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial
• United States v. Cancilla
  725 F.2d 867· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-13 ·cited 50×
  A defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel is violated per se if their trial counsel is personally involved in criminal activity similar to the defendant's charges, and the defendant is unaware of this involvement.
• Unified Sewerage Agency OF Wash. Cnty. v. Jelco Inc.
  646 F.2d 1339· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-01 ·cited 50×
  The court held that an attorney may represent clients with adverse interests if both clients provide informed consent and it is obvious that the attorney can adequately represent both, balancing the client's right to counsel against the duty of loyalty.
• Akerly v. RED Barn Sys., Inc.
  551 F.2d 539· 3d Cir.· 1977-01-26 ·cited 50×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to review the denial of a motion to disqualify an attorney under the collateral order doctrine, but not an appeal from a denial of a motion to dismiss. The court affirmed the denial of the motion to disqualify lead counsel.
• United States v. Darrel Dwayne Youpee
  419 F.2d 1340· 9th Cir.· 1969-12-17 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea, nor did it err in its compliance with Rule 11 or in denying separate counsel.
• Steinhorst v. State
  636 So. 2d 498· Fla.· 1994-04-21 ·cited 49×
  If a trial judge's conflict of interest—specifically prior representation of a murder victim's estate—was not reasonably available to the defendant and could not have been discovered through due diligence, such information constitutes newly discovered evidence cognizable in a rul
• State v. Fitzpatrick
  464 So. 2d 1185· Fla.· 1985-02-28 ·cited 49×
  Florida's Supreme Court held that a state attorney's office is not a "law firm" for purposes of imputed disqualification rules under the Code of Professional Responsibility, and therefore the entire office need not be disqualified when one assistant state attorney receives confid
• Schloetter v. Railoc OF Ind., Inc.
  546 F.2d 706· 7th Cir.· 1976-12-01 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in disqualifying defendant's counsel due to the appearance of impropriety, even if no actual confidential information was shared.
• Walton v. State
  847 So. 2d 438· Fla.· 2003-05-29 ·cited 48×
  Jason Dirk Walton appeals the denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 challenging his conviction for three counts of first-degree murder and three death sentences. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the trial court's denial, fi
• Wilson v. Mintzes
  761 F.2d 275· 6th Cir.· 1985-05-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial judge acted unreasonably in denying the defendant's request for substitute counsel, thus violating the Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice.
• Willie v. Maggio
  737 F.2d 1372· 5th Cir.· 1984-08-06 ·cited 48×
  The court held that jurors exposed to a co-defendant's voir dire, which presented a defense theory but no evidence, were not presumptively biased. The court also found no violation of Edwards v. Arizona regarding the defendant's confession.
• McCRAE v. Louie L. Wainwright
  439 So. 2d 868· Fla.· 1983-09-15 ·cited 48×
  James McCrae, a death row inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus relief challenging his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence. The Florida Supreme Court rejected all three claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of due process, holding that issues not
• Dep't OF Admin. & Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Nelson
  424 So. 2d 852· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-12-08 ·cited 48×
  George Nelson, a state firefighter, challenged DOA rules that automatically terminate employees who seek or hold local public office without prior DOA approval. The court upheld the rules as a valid exercise of delegated legislative authority under the Florida "Little Hatch Act,"