{"id":36874,"date":"2021-09-03T16:02:28","date_gmt":"2021-09-03T16:02:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/downtownlalaw.com\/?page_id=36874"},"modified":"2026-06-14T11:42:39","modified_gmt":"2026-06-14T11:42:39","slug":"judge-rules-that-ex-costco-lawyer-isnt-disqualified-from-suing-costco","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/downtownlalaw.com\/es\/practice-areas\/slip-and-fall\/judge-rules-that-ex-costco-lawyer-isnt-disqualified-from-suing-costco\/","title":{"rendered":"El juez dictamina que el ex abogado de Costco no est\u00e1 inhabilitado para demandar a Costco"},"content":{"rendered":"

Judge Rules that Ex-Costco Lawyer isn\u2019t Disqualified from Suing Costco<\/h1>\n
\n

U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner ruled that Downtown L.A. Law Group will not be disqualified from representing their plaintiff even though one of the current attorneys working at the firm used to work for the defendant.<\/p>\n

Anthony Werbin<\/a>, a lawyer at Downtown L.A. Law Group, previously worked at Manning & Kass, Elrod, Ramirez, Trester LLP; here, he worked over 1,000 hours on Costco\u2019s legal matters, specifically he defended Costco in personal injury cases (at least one case<\/a>) and served as a trial counsel on the company\u2019s behalf. Werbin also attended a conference designed for the company\u2019s California defense attorneys, in which they covered\/discussed litigation and defense tools and strategies for personal injury cases.<\/p>\n

Because of this, there was a motion to disqualify the plaintiff\u2019s counsel. Costco\u2019s attorneys argued that during Werbin\u2019s time as an attorney for the company, Werbin \u201chandled virtually every aspect of Costco\u2019s personal injury lawsuits\u2026[including] developing strategy, communicating with Costco employees [and insurance administrators]\u2026reviewing confidential and privileged documents, preparing responses to discovery, preparing witnesses to testify at depositions and defending numerous depositions of Costco employees, and developing litigation strategy.\u201d Based on this, Costco\u2019s attorneys claimed that DTLA Law Group should not be allowed to represent the plaintiff \u2013 in Rodriguez v. Costco Wholesale Corporation et al. <\/i>(a slip and fall<\/a> case).<\/p>\n

In an opposition filing, DTLA Law Group pushed back against Costco. Igor Fradkin<\/a>, an attorney at the firm, stated that if Costco\u2019s argument was \u201caccepted in this matter, it would effectively prevent any former insurance defense attorney\u2026from working as a plaintiff\u2019s attorney in the future. If we carry this to its absurd conclusion, it would essentially keep an insurance defense attorney from ever switching firms<\/a> and remaining a defense attorney.\u201d<\/p>\n

Ultimately, the judge ruled that Costco failed to establish a significant relationship between the cases that Werbin represented Costco and the current personal injury case that the law<\/a> firm is handling (it is important to note that the personal injury case against Costco is being handled by two attorneys at DTLA Law Group, none of which are Werbin).<\/p>\n

Understanding the Issue<\/span><\/p>\n

The issue here is a conflict of interest specifically related to Anthony Werbin<\/a>, who once was a defense attorney for Costco and is now a plaintiff\u2019s attorney at the firm that is suing the company. In general, when a lawyer has a conflict of interest in a case, then the entire law firm is disqualified from the case (i.e., they cannot represent the plaintiff).<\/p>\n

Of course, there are exceptions. A law firm can be disqualified from a case unless one of the following is true:<\/p>\n