“Foley Must Face Texas Claims From Former Client Turned Opponent” —

• “Foley & Lardner LLP must face claims in Texas that it took confidential information from a former client and sought to use it to seize funds in that client’s bankruptcy proceeding, a state appeals court said Tuesday.”
• “Reversing a Houston trial court, the appeals court said the judge shouldn’t have dismissed claims against Foley under the Texas Citizen’s Participation Act. The act is meant to dismiss harassing lawsuits that attack free speech protections, but it shouldn’t apply here because the claims against Foley relate to conduct, not communications, the unanimous opinion said.”
• “Foley was sued by partners in an oil and gas exploration and production company who the firm once represented. The partners, Stephen and David Dernick, say Foley used confidential information from their past representation of the Dernicks to try to seize funds the Dernicks obtained through a shareholder settlement.”
• “Foley argues it didn’t represent the Dernicks in their individual capacities as officers of the company. The Dernicks say otherwise, that there was ‘an explicit attorney-client relationship.’ Foley negotiated the Dernicks’ exit packages, valued at $25.8 million.”
• “On remand, the trial court is to determine whether Foley’s motion to dismiss was frivolous or solely intended to delay, the appeals court said.”

VIDEO from George Mason University: “Court Hearing on Motion to Disqualify” —

• “Under Rule 1.9 A, what factors determine whether a lawyer’s prior representation of a former client is substantially related to a potential new representation of another client in a matter that will be materially adverse to the former client in this context, what is the significance, if any, if the lead counsel and the prior representation are no longer associated with the law firm?”