Flashcards Studio

Atty. Arkin previously represented VivaCom Energy, Inc. (VivaCom) in a civil dispute arising from a turbine procurement contract with Metro Energy Authority (MEA). During the engagement, Arkin learned confidential information about VivaCom’s bidding strategies, procurement criteria, and anticipated defenses. VivaCom now refuses to consent to Arkin representing NorthPeak Renewable, Ltd. (NPR) in a civil action by NPR against VivaCom for breach of the same turbine procurement contract, seeking damages. The turbine contract and the new action involve the same project and substantially similar facts. a)Identify the CPRA doctrine governing representation of a current client against a former client in a substantially related matter where confidential information could be used to the former client’s disadvantage. b)Based on the facts, does Arkin’s proposed representation create a disqualifying conflict? Explain your reasoning. c)If a conflict exists, discuss whether any permitted mechanism (e.g., informed consent in writing, screening) could cure the conflict and under what conditions. Conclude with what Arkin should do under CPRA.