Judge: Ronald F. Frank, Case: 20TRCV00508, Date: 2023-01-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20TRCV00508    Hearing Date: January 25, 2023    Dept: 8

Tentative Ruling

HEARING DATE:                 January 25, 2023 

CASE NUMBER:                  20TRCV00508

CASE NAME:                        Bergamon, Inc. v. Ridgerock Tools, Inc., et al

MOVING PARTY:                Plaintiff, Bergamon, Inc.  

RESPONDING PARTY:       Defendant, Ridgerock Tools, Inc. and Niann-Tsyr Shuai

TRIAL DATE:                        October 31, 2023

MOTION:                               (1) Motion to Disqualify Counsel James Menke

Tentative Ruling:                    (1) DENIED.  The two supplemental declarations filed on 1/11/23 do not change the Court’s prior tentative ruling.  Further, neither side has submitted a precedent addressing a motion to disqualify counsel of record based on an asserted conflict of interest by her or his in-house counsel

            The Court finds, on the record presented, that Bergamon has not met its burden of proving that Mr. Menke or his firm should be disqualified from representing Ridgerock or the individual defendants in these Related Cases. 

Nonetheless, the Court has ongoing concerns about the “incestuous” nature of the relationships among the individuals and the entities named as parties in this case, especially in so far as Mr. Honey himself has provided legal representation even in a limited way to multiple actors and parties in these Related Cases.  Further, the recently filed Wu Cross-Complaint may well cross the line of substantial relatedness; in the Court’s view it triggered a fresh look at how Mr. Honey may ethically proceed going forward.  To avoid the appearance of impropriety, to maintain the public trust and ensure the ethical integrity of the Bar, and to ensure that any confidences or secrets of Bergamon or Mr. Liew are preserved for the balance of this litigation, the Court adopts Mr. Honey’s offer in his declaration to wall himself off from litigation counsel and other employees/officers of Ridgerock.  Accordingly, THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

1.       Mr. Honey shall not have any further communications with Ridgerock’s outside counsel relating to this litigation.  This includes but is not limited to telephonic, face-to-face, email, and any other forms of communication.  He shall not be copied or ecc’d or bcc’d on any emails from or to Mr. Menke or his firm.  A different member of Ridgerock’s staff or legal department shall be identified as the point of contact with Ridgerock’s litigation counsel as to any and all matters bearing on the Related Cases forthwith.

2.      After he receives notice of this ruling, Mr. Honey shall not have any further communications with any employees, officers, or other representatives of Ridgerock regarding the Related Cases until the litigation is finally resolved. Mr. Honey shall exclude himself from any meetings at which the Related Cases are on an agenda.  Mr. Honey shall be excluded from any communications regarding the budget or billings to Ridgerock in the Related Cases. 

3.      An exception to this Order may arise if Mr. Honey becomes a fact witness as to any disputed issue in this case, but only so that a Ridgerock employee or officer can notify Mr. Honey of his potential role as a witness and if his deposition or trial testimony is being sought in either of the Related Cases.  If so, Ridgerock’s counsel may schedule an IDC with the Court to address how that issue may effectively be handled consistent with this Order, including the possible retention of independent counsel for Mr. Honey.

4.      Mr. Honey shall continue to preserve the confidences and secrets of his former client or clients including the assertion in the Related Cases on the former client’s behalf of attorney-client privilege as appropriate, unless the former client expressly waives that privilege (for example, so that Mr. Honey can give a deposition regarding communications with that former client).   

5.      Mr. Honey is not barred by this Order from providing legal advice and services to Ridgerock in connection with any other legal matters besides the Related Cases and their cross-complaint(s).

 Counsel for Ridgerock shall give notice of this ruling and shall ensure that notice be provided the counsel’s alternate point of contact at Ridgerock who shall so notify Mr. Honey himself of this ruling.