◆ SpookStack

Tr sseeaaperet senior member of the law fim of Hogan & Hartoon wan consulted professionally by the deponent in the deponcnt's capacity as attorncy for preparation and/or execution of the decedent's wills and/or codicils and powers of attorney. As a result thereof it appears very probable that said scnior member of the law firm of Hogan & Hartson will be a witness in the caveat - procecding. 5. Under Canon 5 of the Canons of Ethics, it is contrary to the ethics of the profession to have counsel act aa attorney for one of the litigants and as a witness in that litigant'‘s behalf. As stated in paragraph 9 of Canon 5, opposing counsel may be handicapped in challenging the credibility of the lawyer. It further places an advocate in the position of arguing his own credibility. 6. The roles of advocate and witness are inconsistent; the function of an advocate is to advance or argue the cause of WHEREFORE, under the foregoing circumstances, it appears obligatory that Hillory A. Tolson, through his counsel, move the vacation of this Court's Order of August 19, 1975 authorizing another, while that of a witness is to state facts objectively. John P. Mohr to employ the law firm of Hogan & Hartson in this herein. Plea ke Cetus. Rolland G. Lamensdorf Attorney for Hillory A. Tolson feral 1815 H Street, N.W. ei. Washington, D.c, 20006 ; Telephone: 393-1565 matter, and further object to said firm being appointed counsel me ae a ee,