Adams v. Aerojet-General Corp.
California Court of Appeal
86 Cal. App. 4th 1324, 104 Cal. Rptr. 2d 116 (2001)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Attorney Michael Hackard was a partner in a three-partner firm that advised Aerojet-General Corp. (Aerojet) (defendant) but did not work on Aerojet matters himself. Aerojet gave the firm confidential information about chemical contamination at its hazardous-waste treatment and disposal site and surrounding areas and its strategies for handling environmental litigation and public relations. Hackard said no one shared any information about or discussed Aerojet matters with him. Nine years later, Hackard’s new firm represented numerous residents who brought a toxic-tort action against Aerojet alleging it contaminated the groundwater and surrounding soils. Aerojet moved to disqualify Hackard’s new firm from representing the residents. The trial court applied the imputed-knowledge rule and concluded a presumption applied that Hackard gained confidential information about Aerojet at his former firm that required disqualification. The residents appealed, arguing Hackard had no personal knowledge or confidential information about Aerojet.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Callahan, J.)
Dissent (Scotland, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.