Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
'
\:
'i.
~'
,i
I'
"
1'
.. .
,
.
.
I,,,
- , '..
Plaintiff
. ll
l
'
,I
v.
'
:
:
:
:
:
Defendant
..
:
:
'
i
;
' '
.,
'
'
\
'l
'
J,
I
I
:'
'
''
l':
.
.
.
I\
'
.'
i
'
..
i
I
I
I
':
i
'
I
'
i. ,'
ORDER
'~
jj
'
'
'
'.!,-',
..
.' '; .
~
.f
,l
AN,D NOW, this _ _ day of July, 2015, upon consideration of Plaintiffs Motion To
l'
1'
!. '
J.
1:!
i'
''
!'
:
.j
\.
.,
''
.;
!,
'
'"i'-!
I
I
i I
>J
,I
'
"
I
'l
,..
. ,.1
:
" .,
'
'.
1,
.,
i
'
'
':, 1,>::
_;'
,.
I
'I
I
i ,'
I
.I
:!
i
i,
:1
.,
I'
l
,,
i
:
'I
i.
.. '
'I
i:
\~ .
']
'
'!
"1
:.,'J
('
I"
',
1 :; ~
.1
!"
..
...
.. [, :..
I.;,
,;
: i .
'
! ;
':
'.
":. ! .
...
I,,'
'.' !
v ..
'I
iI
.
Case No: 15-cv-3304-TON
' ! '
. i "~ '
Defendant
.
...
.
'
;.
'
. I
.
'
'
: ''
Plaintiff Gordon Roy Parker ("Plaintiff''), in the above-styled action, moves this Comt tq
'
. !
disqualify defense counsel due to the existence or appearance of a fatal conflict of interest. In!
I
'
~ '
..
"
i
i
'
Defense has gone well beyond the scope of its role in representating its client,
.!
t
I
I
ii
:'
1.
'
iI
'
'
j.
_;.
1 '::
~
i'
i:.
~
~ontr~ctor, covered by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ~- u'nder which it is required. to apply
i'
3.
I
'.
'
'.
1.
2.
: .. ; 1
'.
i.
Plaintiff is on SSDI, and currently has lawsuits pending linder the Rehabilitati~n
'
Act of 1973; and soon Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
'
,(:,
,.
..
declaring most recently that Plaintiff was "physically and mentally unfit to enter into an
'.
I
i
1. ',
'.; '
1..
iI
I I
\ "",'
. 4. . Unless defense counsel was comitting fraud upon the court, it an:d its fi~
holds
.
!.
.
'. !
i'
the belief expressed in the pleading, one which would give rise to a lawsuit under the
'
l '
5.
'
[ i
.':'
Plaintiff, threatening him in one phone call .with "taking [his] shoes and computer,"
"!
'i
6.
l ['
,' "
'I
i
. :
7.
1',,)
'
'
'
its position ill this litigation to attempt to bar Plaintiff from ever applying to work for his firm.:
8.
\ ~
employment which will lift him off the dole. He would begin working_tomorrow at any firm l~ke :
j'
.
I
'
!
Plaintiff will be seeking relief via the EEOC for Defendant's remarks in its
pleadings, under the belief that a) similar remarks have been made elsewhere; and b) the
i
underlying animus which yielded the pleading remains long after the litigation. This too shaU:
!.
. ' l
'
:
!
,,
:'
:
'
"
.j
.1
9.
! . ~
The resolution is simple: Pfai~tiffhas no conflict with lawyers who are not
I
I
'
I
I
' '
I
I
:
'
An Order disqualifying defense counsel and replacing him with an attorney who is not a :
: I
federal contractor.
',l
'
'
j'.
:~
J,
. i
~ I
,!
i
. i'
'1
''
t.:
'I
. ..
I
.
MEMORANDUM
. "j
None necessary. This is decided on.a case-by-case basis, with the underlying law well-
~ ' i
known to all parties concerned. The appearance of a conflict is the same as an actual conflict,.
'
I.
I
'
.. '
1
I
.':i:
'
'
"!
"
I
I
..
!
\
II.
l
l
i
!
i !
'
:!
"
'
'
:!
t'