Justice Paul Baisley Jr.
Plaintiffs sought damages for personal injuries sustained in a collision. Earl was a passenger in Shelby’s car, which was struck by Blakes’ car. Law firm Borda, Kennedy, Alsen & Gold represented both plaintiffs, yet the firm of Gruenberg Kelly Della (GKD) was substituted as Earl’s counsel. The firms entered into an agreement for division of attorney fees. GKD rescinded the agreement arguing the Borda firm’s dual representation of plaintiffs created a conflict of interest in violation of New York State disciplinary rules. The action settled and GKD sought to disqualify the Borda firm from collecting its portion of the charging lien arguing they must be disqualified as a result of its clear violation of the disciplinary rules. The Borda firm cross-moved for a hearing to determine the fees to be awarded to each firm alleging it did not violate the disciplinary rules from its dual representation of plaintiffs. The court found the Borda firm acted consistent with the Rule 1.7 standard as, given the facts, a reasonable attorney would not have concluded plaintiffs had differing interest. Thus, it ruled no basis existed to disqualify the Borda firm from asserting its charging lien for work it performed on behalf of Earl, granting the Borda firm’s cross-motion.
