Here, law firm disqualified because it represented plaintiff and defendant at the same time in different cases.  Lawfirm’s response, No, its OK!!

"HRH Construction LLC v. Palazzo, 600857/06
Decided: May 4, 2007

Moreover, although multiple representation may be permissible where, after full disclosure of the risks of such representation, the attorney has obtained the consent of both parties, here there is no indication that disclosure was made and consent obtained. Although HRH may well have been sloppy about keeping track of the attorneys that represented the company in different cases, a client has no fiduciary duty to be vigilant about the identity of its attorneys. In contrast, given the mandates of DR 5-105 and DR 9-101, attorneys have a responsibility to "’avoid not only the fact, but even the appearance, of representing conflicting interests’" (Cinema 5 Ltd. v. Cinerama, Inc., 528 F2d at 1387 [citation omitted]), and to insure that they have not undertaken simultaneous representation without disclosing the existence of that representation and obtaining consent of both clients. Unfortunately, counsel for defendants have failed to do so here.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to disqualify is granted. "