“
The effectiveness of a client’s prospective waiver of a conflict depends upon whether the conflict is consentable in the first place, and how clearly the waiver identifies the anticipated conflict. Compare Celgene Corp. v. KV Pharm. Co., Civ. No. 07-4819 (SDW), 2008 WL 2937415, 2008 BL 158060 (D.N.J. July 29, 2008) (disqualification despite advance waivers), Worldspan, L.P. v. Sabre Grp. Holdings, Inc., 5 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (N.D. Ga. 1998) (same), Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP v. J-M Mfg., Inc., 425 P.3d 1 (Cal. 2018) (not enforced where law firm did not disclose existing relationship), and Cedar Rapids Bank & Trust Co. v. Mako One Corp., 919 F. 3d 529 (8th Cir. 2019) (not enough information in waiver), with Hartford Steam Boiler Inspection & Ins. Co. v. Campbell,
”
”
Ellen J. Bennett (Annotated Model Rules of Professional Conduct, Tenth Edition)