Risk Update

Curious Conflicts — “Stranger” Cannot Call Pickleball Club Conflict, Argument on Behalf of Client Proves Conflict

Posted Dan Bressler

David Kluft asks: “If I argue there is no conflict between my clients because they don’t have viable claims against each other, have I just proven that there is a conflict?” —

  • “A and B each owned 50% of a Massachusetts LLC. In the context of a complex litigation, they sued each other, and A brought derivative breach of fiduciary claims against B on behalf of the LLC.”
  • “The same lawyer appeared in the case for both B and the LLC. A moved to disqualify her, arguing that her two clients (B and the LLC) had claims against each other. The lower court disqualified her.”
  • “The lawyer argued on appeal that the LLC wasn’t a real party and in any case the LLC’s derivative claims against B were bogus.”
  • “The Appeals Court held: well, you just made the lower court’s point. Your argument on behalf of B that your other client, the LLC, has no viable claims demonstrates a conflict of interest and is ‘the very reason Rule 1.7 exists.’ Disqualification affirmed.”

“Who Can Disqualify Counsel? Standing Matters; 3rd DCA Shuts Down ‘Stranger’ Conflict Challenge” —

  • “In Takefman v. The Pickleball Club (Fla. 3d DCA 2025), a plaintiff sued The Pickleball Club LLC, its CEO, and its CFO — then tried to disqualify their law firm on conflict grounds. The problem? He had never been that firm’s client.”
  • “The Third DCA affirmed the denial of disqualification, and the opinion is a clean refresher on standing to disqualify counsel:
    • As a general rule, only a current or former client has standing to seek disqualification based on conflicts of interest or confidentiality concerns.”
  • A third-party litigant without privity to the law firm is a ‘stranger’ to the attorney-client relationship and typically cannot invoke conflict rules as a weapon.”
  • “The court noted a narrow exception: a non-client may sometimes seek disqualification where necessary for the fair and efficient administration of justice. But there was no such showing here. The firm had obtained informed consent from the LLC, CEO, and CFO; there was no evidence of divided loyalty that affected the fairness of the proceedings.”
  • “Practice pointers”
    • “For movants: Before filing a motion to disqualify, ask: Did this firm ever represent me? Can I articulate a concrete prejudice to the proceedings, not just discomfort? If not, you may lack standing — and the motion may look tactical rather than principled.”
    • “For counsel: When representing an entity and its principals, obtain written conflict waivers / informed-consent letters contemporaneously. Keep the file clean enough that, if challenged, you can quickly demonstrate who your clients are and what was disclosed.”
  • “Takeaway: Disqualification is an extraordinary remedy, not a litigation tactic for outsiders. If you’re not the lawyer’s client — and can’t show a systemic threat to the integrity of the case — you likely don’t have standing to knock opposing counsel out.”