In re State Grand Jury Investigation
New Jersey Supreme Court
983 A.2d 1097 (2009)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The state (plaintiff) instituted a grand-jury investigation into a corporation (defendant). The corporation hired four attorneys to represent its employees in connection with the investigation: three for each of the three individual employees identified in the investigation and one for all other current and former employees. Each attorney included in his retention letter the requirement that the attorney’s sole responsibility was to the employee-client and not the corporation. The retention letters also stated that the attorneys were not required to disclose any privileged communications or legal strategy to the corporation. The state filed a motion to disqualify the attorneys from representing the employees on the ground that the representation was a conflict of interest. All of the employees involved certified to the court that they were satisfied with the arrangement and with their representation by the attorneys the corporation provided. The trial court denied the state’s motion. The state appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rivera-Soto, 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.