Details over at Legal Profession Blog. I understand the rationale, which applies the crime-fraud exception, but it's always jarring to hear of a criminal defense lawyer being a key witness against a former client.
« Berkeley's Dean Edley is inaugural holder of legal ethics chair | Main | Rico v. Mitsubishi to be decided tomorrow (inadvertent disclosure) »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341cb84553ef00e54fa0dc428833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Disturbing holding: lawyer must testify against former client:
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Comments