MEMORANDUM ORDER Plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief claiming a pattern of fraudulent misconduct, ripe with knavery, in connection with defendants’ attempts to obtain operational control of plaintiffs’ automobile dealerships. The complaint alleges claims for (1) violations of the Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”); (2) violations of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (“DTSA”); (3) unfair competition; (4) tortious interference; (5) unjust enrichment; (6) conversion; (7) fraud; (8) breach of fiduciary duty; and (9) conspiracy. (See generally Amended Complaint filed at ECF No. 65.) Every procedural step in this case thus far has been fraught with foofaraw, even though the case is only in its nascent stage. The latest kerfuffle is Plaintiffs’ motion to disqualify defense Harry R. Thomasson, Jr. (“Thomasson”) (ECF No. 85) on the grounds that (i) he’s both an advocate and witness, (ii) he has an irreconcilable conflict among con-defendants, and (iii) he previously represented certain plaintiffs in substantially related matters at issue here. Upon review of the parties’ submissions and having heard oral argument, Plaintiffs’ motion to disqualify counsel is hereby granted, and Harry R. Thomasson is disqualified from representing all defendants with the exception of himself, for whom he may continue to appear pro se. FACTUAL BACKGROUND The Court assumes familiarity with this case, incorporating the factual background set forth by the Hon. Orelia E. Merchant in her order granting in part and denying in part the motion for a preliminary injunction filed at ECF No. 55. Thus, only the facts germane to this motion are discussed. Plaintiffs are numerous individuals and corporate car dealerships. (ECF No. 65 at
8-25.) Defendants are numerous individuals and corporations. (Id. at
