Conflict of Interest

Improper Representation

In representing my X they are attempting to control her. They definitely don't want her to get her own lawyer. If she got her own lawyer it is very likely that her own lawyer would file a cross suit against her divorce lawyers, and they don't want that to happen. So they're representing my X for free while they pay for their own representation.

Her divorce lawyers are used to County Family Court where the judges don't have a clue as to what the law is and could care less. I'm hoping that the federal judges are a little more sophisticated and will not allow blaintent abouse of process in thier court. Maybe I'm dreaming here but I expect the federal could to do a better job of at least faking justice.

              IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
                     WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
                           SOUTHERN DISTRICT

                            CIVIL COMPLAINT
                            ---------------


Marc Perkel - pro se              )
                                  )
vs.                               )  No. 96-3383-CV-S-AE
                                  )
Commissioner Scott Tinsley        )
Greene County Circuit Court       )
William A. Wear Jr.               )
James R. Sharp                    )
The Lawfirm of Wear and Sharp     )
Vicki Stringfellow                )


          MOTION TO DISQUALIFY DEFENDANT VICKI STRINGFELLOW'S
                  ATTORNEYS FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST
          ===================================================

COMES NOW, Plaintiff Marc Perkel and asks the Court to prohibit
Defendants Wear and Sharp from representing Defendant Vicki Stringfellow
in this action because such representation would be a conflict of
interest. In support of this motion, Plaintiff states as follows:

1) That Ms. Stringfellow's attorneys are also defendants in this action
   and one defendant can not fairly represent another defendant.

   In paragraph 10 of Ms. Stringfellow's "Motion to dismiss of defendant
   Vicki Stringfellow" as prepared by her attorney and codefendant
   James R. Sharp, Sharp states:

      "Plaintiff's only allegation against Defendant Vicki Stringfellow,
      was that Defendants, Wear and Sharp were acting as her agent and,
      therefore, Plaintiff's cause of action against Defendant succeeds
      or fails based on the merit of his cause of action against
      Defendants, Wear and Sharp."

   This is hardly true. If Plaintiff's allegations are proved to have
   merit, Defendant Stringfellow might want to file a cross claim
   against Defendants Wear and Sharp.

   In Defendant Wear and Sharp's "Suggestions in support of motion to
   dismiss of Defendants William Wear and James Sharp", prepared by
   their attorneys, Dunald R. Duncan and Steven E. Ward, of the lawfirm
   Turner, Reid, Duncan, Loomer and Patton, Defendant's attorneys state
   in the section entitled, "Relevant Facts" that "Defendant Sharp, on
   behalf of Ms. Stringfellow filed a motion for sanctions .... "

   In Defendant Stringfellow's "Suggestions in support of motion to
   dismiss of Defendant Vicki Stringfellow" prepared by Defendant James
   Sharp, Defendant Stringfellow adopts all statements made in defense
   of Wear and Sharp.

   If Defendant Stringfellow were represented by separate counsel she
   might not want to make that claim that these acts were done in her
   behalf. She may want to separate herself from the liability of the
   acts of Wear and Sharp.

2) Plaintiff will not be able to depose Defendant Stringfellow without
   Defendant's Wear and Sharp present and have her counsel Wear and
   Sharp present.

3) If Defendant Stringfellow is represented by Defendant's Wear and
   Sharp, Plaintiff Marc Perkel is denied the opportunity to reach a
   separate settlement with Defendant Stringfellow.

4) This representation of Defendant Stringfellow by Codefendant Wear
   and Sharp is a blantant violation of the Rules of Professional
   Conduct under Rule 1.7 "Conflict of Interest" which states:

      " ... when a disinterested lawyer would conclude that the client
      should not agree to the representation under the circumstances,
      the lawyer involved cannot properly ask for such agreement or
      provide representation on the basis of the clients consent."



WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays the Court grant his motion and order the
Defendants Wear and Sharp be prohibited from representing Defendant
Stringfellow and to strike their motions made in her behalf.



-------------------------------------------
Marc Perkel * Plaintiff