LFP Counsel Says Louis Sirkin Can’t Represent Jimmy Flynt Sr.
Jimmy Flynt Sr. last month refused to answer questions relevant to the use of the “Flynt” name on Flynt Media Corp. products at a deposition in Cincinnati.
On advice from his attorney, Sirkin, Jimmy Flynt Sr. asserted his 5th Amendment privilege. He was expected to discuss the formation of Flynt Media Corp. and the use of the Flynt name and mark.
Larry Flynt and LFP Inc. are suing Jimmy Flynt Sr. sons Jimmy II and Dustin over the use of Flynt Media Corp. name, claiming the name is too similar to their own. LFP already has won a preliminary injunction against Flynt Media Corp., and the case goes to trial this month.
In Friday’s motion, Larry Flynt and LFP Inc. said that Sirkin is working on behalf of HH-Lexington LLC, which does business as Hustler Hollywood in Lexington, Ohio, and is appealing a criminal conviction over breaking a Lexington zoning ordinance that prohibits adult-oriented businesses near interstate highway interchanges.
“This proceeding is directly adverse to the interests of Larry C. Flynt, a plaintiff in the underlying action, while Sirkin represents Flynt’s economic interests in a currently pending matter in another court,” the motion said. “Such representation is a conflict of interest pursuant to Rule 1.7 of the Ohio Model Code of Professional Responsibility governing such matters.”
Larry Flynt and LFP Inc. attorney Anthony Covatta noted in the motion that conflict-of-interest rules are clearly spelled out with the Ohio bar.
Comment 8 to the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct clarifies states, “[A]bsent consent, a lawyer may not act as an advocate in one proceeding against a person the lawyer represents in some other matter, even when the matters are wholly unrelated,” Brown said.
Brown also supplied documents in the brief that showed that Sirkin was warned by Paul Cambria’s firm — Lipsitz, Green, Scime and Cambria — that there was conflict of interest.
XBIZ was unable to reach both Sirkin and Covatta late Monday afternoon.