Marc H. Gold, as a Member of the Board of Directors of the Defendant Corporation v. Cambridge Diagnostic Products, Inc.
The Fourth District reversed an order denying disqualification of corporate counsel as untimely in a minority shareholder's corporate records action. The court held the disqualification motion was timely because the appellant's basis for disqualification rose above speculation only when the same attorney began simultaneously representing the corporation and the two majority shareholders in a companion derivative action. On remand, the trial court must decide the disqualification motion on the merits.
Key facts
- Marc H. Gold, a minority shareholder and board member, sued Cambridge Diagnostic Products, Inc. in a corporate records action in Broward County; Cambridge retained attorney Reid Cocalis of Tripp Scott, P.A.
- Gold contended Cocalis was slowing or blocking discovery in the records action to protect the majority shareholders.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Holdings
- A motion to disqualify counsel must be made with reasonable promptness after the party discovers the facts giving rise to the motion; timeliness is measured from when the conflict became…
- +2 more holdings with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision is directly useful in closely held corporate disputes, where a single firm often represents both the entity and its controlling shareholders across parallel records, direct, and derivative actions. The… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.