Privileged communication/information

[LIGHTHOPE]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA
Lawyer was substituted out for a variety of reasons. Due to some questions about the case the new atty of record was in contact with former atty. During the latest court appearance, opposing council was in possession of information, some of it privileged, as well as information regarding former atty , misc. actions, including pending investigations that the new attorney of record hadn't even obtained yet. When opposing council was questioned about how she came to learn of this information, she announced that the former attorney had been forwarding or CC: all communication fmr atty has been having with new atty of record.
My questions are:
1. Isn't the former attorney still bound by confidentiality?
2. Shouldn't there still be an expectation of professional/ethical duty by attorney who sub-ed out re any communication pertaining to case?
3. If this is a violation, is it reasonable to believe or be under the assumption that former atty divulged case info in its entirety?
4. If so, then how would the case be able to proceed in a just way?
5. What recourse is there against former atty if her actions were unethical, unprofessional and even malicious? (history of this behavior: sub-ed out lawyer has an addiction to pain medication and would get loaded then she'd get on the phone with other counsel or email her, spilling strategy and investigator's findings and reports)
Help shed some light on this for me please! Thanks!

 

[Mass_Shyster]

If former attorney divulged confidential information, a complaint can be filed with the state bar association.

Unless you can prove (with a preponderance of evidence) that the attorney's breach of confidentiality caused you financial damages, you won't win a malpractice suit.

 

[LIGHTHOPE]

By giving OC any information pertaining to the course of this case causes a potential financial loss since the case issues at the moment revolve around settlement, and since OP has been very clever hiding assets(which researcher has been uncovering)there is a probability OP would again move or hide monies, businesses, etc if tipped off. (this has already happened and overnight 2 accounts 'disappeared')
The relief sought besides the ABA would be at the local court level for some sort of ruling on how to procede with such a breech. The only "punishment" sought for fmr atty would be a formal diciplinary action. If the OC is at fault for continuing to gather the info being given to her even when fmr atty was obviously intoxicated/high & instead of stopping her from disclosing for the sake of ethics, then she too should be reprimanded. However, there is no intention of suing for malpractice. Basically, the issue at hand is whether or not former atty breeched ethics and how it all affects the case from a fairness view.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

By giving OC any information pertaining to the course of this case causes a potential financial loss since the case issues at the moment revolve around settlement, and since OP has been very clever hiding assets(which researcher has been uncovering)there is a probability OP would again move or hide monies, businesses, etc if tipped off. (this has already happened and overnight 2 accounts 'disappeared')
The relief sought besides the ABA would be at the local court level for some sort of ruling on how to procede with such a breech. The only "punishment" sought for fmr atty would be a formal diciplinary action. If the OC is at fault for continuing to gather the info being given to her even when fmr atty was obviously intoxicated/high & instead of stopping her from disclosing for the sake of ethics, then she too should be reprimanded. However, there is no intention of suing for malpractice. Basically, the issue at hand is whether or not former atty breeched ethics and how it all affects the case from a fairness view.

On message boards like this one, OP means Original Poster (LIGHTHOPE). I'm guessing that's not what you mean, as you would be referring to yourself in the third person. Please define your acronyms.

 

[LIGHTHOPE]

I apologize for the error. I was trying to say opposing party. Very sorry.