In Neal v. Health Net, Inc. (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 831, an attorney filed a discrimination case on behalf of a former employee (Neal) of the defendant employer. (Neal, at p. 834.) Two months later, the same attorney agreed to represent another former employee (Brockett) of the same employer. (Id. at pp. 834-836.) Before her employment terminated, Brockett, a legal secretary, had access to the employer's legal files and had in fact opened the electronic Neal file, which included "attorney notes and memoranda." (Ibid.) Brockett claimed in her declaration that she had accessed this file only to obtain the name of Neal's attorney, and that she did not actually review documents pertinent to Neal's case. (Id. at pp. 836-837.) The employer filed a motion to disqualify the attorney in the Neal case based on the theory that he presumably had received confidential information from Brockett about the Neal case. (Id. at pp. 834-837.) The appellate court reversed the order of disqualification. (Id. at p. 850.) There is no "presumption of possession of confidential information" in these circumstances. (Id. at p. 841.) And there was no evidence submitted showing that "information, confidential or otherwise, concerning Neal's case was given to the attorney by Ms. Brockett." (Id. at p. 843.)