In A.F. v. Jeffrey F., the Fourth District reversed a decision that disqualified an attorney from representing both a mother and child in a [[Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO)]] action against the child's father. The court found that there was no evidence to support the trial court's finding that the attorney simultaneously represented both clients, and thus disqualifying the attorney was an [[Abuse of Discretion|abuse of discretion]] based on [[Cal. Rules of Prof. Conduct, Rule 1.7]] ![[D079373.PDF]] <!-- citation-library:start --> ## Citation reference A.F. v. Jeffrey F. (2022) 79 Cal.App.5th 737, 294 Cal.Rptr.3d 700 > [!info] Working notes > This is a personal working note. Citation details are for reference; opinion and current-status verification may still be pending. <!-- citation-library:end --> ## Preserved imported excerpt A.F. [Full Text] [CFLR]: In a reversal, the Fourth District held substantial evidence failed to support the trial court’s finding that attorney simultaneously represented mother and child in DVRO action brought by child against father, and it was therefore an abuse of discretion to disqualify attorney based on Cal Rules of Prof Conduct, rule 1.7 [conflict of interest among current clients]. A.F. v. Jeffrey F. (5/18/22; ord pub 6/9/22) 4 Civ D079373 (Div 1, Huffman) 2022 DJDAR 5815, 2022 WL 2071996, 79 Cal.App.5th 737, 294 Cal.Rptr.3d 700, CFLP §A.70, 2022 CFLR 15134, 2022 FA 2041(no pet f)