In S & S Hotel Venures Ltd. Partnership v. 777 S.H. Corp, 69 NY2d 437 [1987]) the Court of Appeals addressed the application of DR 5-102 in a motion to disqualify an attorney from further representation of a client in litigation because the attorney may be called as a witness. The Court held that: "Disqualification of a law firm during litigation implicates not only the ethics of the profession but also the substantive rights of the litigants. Disqualification denies a party's right to representation by the attorney of its choice." (69 NY2d at 443). The Court warned against a mechanical application of DR 5-102 in disqualifying counsel in litigation, stating that the Code provides "guidance for the courts in determining whether a case would be tainted by the participation of an attorney of a firm" (69 NY2d at 444-445). The party seeking disqualification bears the burden of showing the taint or unfairness arising from the lawyer's testimony in the case (id.). Moreover, the moving party must show not only that the lawyer ought to or is likely to be called as a witness, but that the likely testimony is necessary (id.)