Curvin J. Trone, Jr., Trustee for Westgate Californiacorporation, et al., Plaintiffs-respondents, v. C. Arnholt Smith et al., Defendants-petitioners, 553 F.2d 1207 (9th Cir. 1977)
Annotate this CaseAlan D. Croll, Alan C. Lebow, Wyman, Bautzer, Rothman & Kuchel, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiffs-respondents.
Thomas R. Sheridan, Simon & Sheridan, Mitchell L. Lathrop, Thomas S. Kidde, Kenneth A. Braun, Macdonald, Halsted & Laybourne, Los Angeles, Cal., Robert G. Steiner, Michael J. Weaver, Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps, San Diego, Cal., for defendants-petitioners.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.
Before BROWNING and TRASK, Circuit Judges.
Despite the implications in Cord v. Smith, 338 F.2d 516 (9th Cir. 1964), we conclude that 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) is not the proper avenue by which to obtain review of the district court's denial of a motion to disqualify an attorney for conflict of interest. See Silver Chrysler Plymouth, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 496 F.2d 800 (2d Cir. 1974) (in banc). See also Melamed v. ITT Continental Baking Co., 534 F.2d 82 (6th Cir. 1976); Draganescu v. First National Bank of Hollywood, 502 F.2d 550 (5th Cir. 1974). We therefore deny permission to appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The accompanying motion for a stay of further proceedings is denied without prejudice.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
