Law Firm Of Attorney Who Volunteered To Conduct A Settlement Conference & Received Confidential Information Cannot Later Represent A Party To The Action.

An attorney served as a settlement officer in a mandatory settlement conference conducted by a judge and two volunteer attorneys in a case which did not settle. Later, the law firm of the attorney substituted in to represent the defendant in the same action. The trial court denied a motion to disqualify the law firm. The Court of Appeal granted a writ of mandate, holding:  “If the attorney receives confidential information from one of the parties to the action, that attorney’s law firm may not subsequently agree to represent an opposing party in the same action, regardless of the efficacy of the screening procedures established by the law firm.” But the Court of Appeal also ordered the matter remanded for a hearing, stating:  “If the court finds [the attorney] did not engage in ex parte communications with [plaintiff’s] representatives (either directly or by communication with the other attorneys or the judge who presided over the settlement conference), it shall reinstate its order denying disqualification of the [] law firm.” (Castaneda v. Sup. Ct. (Perrin Bernard Supowitz) (Cal. App. Second Dist., Div. 8; June 24, 2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 1434 [188 Cal.Rptr.3d 889].)