PADRAIC RYAN VS. TRENT MICHELS ET AL

Matter on the LAW & MOTION/DISCOVERY CALENDAR for Monday, Jun-23-2025, LINE 11. DEFENDANTS ECO BAY SERVICES, INC., and TRENT MICHELS' Motion For Protective Order. (PART ONE OF TWO)

Defendant and Cross-complainant Eco Bay Services, Inc.'s motion for a protective order is granted. Eco Bay is relieved from the obligation to respond to any or all of the document requests, special interrogatories, and requests for admissions propounded on it on or about March 12, 2025 "focused on conflict issues." (Alparce 3/12/2025 letter p. 6).

Plaintiff Padraic Ryan has not provided any authority, nor is the court aware of any authority, permitting discovery to aid in the preparation of a motion to disqualify counsel. Generally speaking, a motion to disqualify opposing counsel usually is and should be made soon after the assertedly conflicted counsel appears in the case or the conflict is discovered based solely on the information known to the party asserting the conflict without need for discovery. Propounding discovery to develop facts to support a disqualification motion is fraught with many hazards, not least being the strong likelihood of serious attorney-client and work product disputes, devotion of undue time to collateral issues, significant delay in resolving the merits of the case, and embroilment of counsel.

Even if discovery for the purpose of developing facts for a disqualification motion is permissible, this is not an appropriate case for such discovery. Gene Ryu and K&L Gates first appeared in this case on behalf of Trent Michels and Eco Bay on June 13, 2024. No later than February 25, 2025 Mr. Ryan contended that Mr. Ryu and K&L were disqualified from representing Mr. Michels and Eco Bay. (Alparce 2/25/2025 letter). If Mr. Ryan had enough information to contend that Mr. Ryu and K&L were disqualified, then he could have filed his motion forthwith.

A review of the assertions of the bases for the claimed conflict and the discovery propounded by Mr. Ryan as to the conflict issues discloses that the discovery is highly intrusive, immensely overbroad, and unlikely to result in any information that Mr. Ryan does not now know to enable him to file a disqualification motion. Nothing in this ruling is intended to state or suggest any views as to how the court would rule in the event that Mr. Ryan chooses to file a motion to disqualify Mr. Ryu and K&L. ***END OF PART ONE OF TWO*** =(302/HEK) | |