Skiff - Murray v. Murray

In Skiff - Murray v. Murray (3 AD3d 610, 613 [3d Dept 2004]), the Third Department pointed out that "disqualification may be premature where discovery is needed to establish the substance and necessity of the attorney's expected testimony" but not where there is "little doubt as to the substance of the attorney's testimony or the need for it to establish his client's cause of action."