An attorney may be legally disqualified from representing a person or entity—often due to a conflict of interest. Attorney disqualification is a severe remedy, and has the potential to cause immediate harm by depriving a party of its chosen counsel, and disrupting court proceedings. Thus, a party requesting disqualification of an attorney generally has a high burden of proof, and must establish with specificity the basis for disqualification.

To meet this burden, mere allegations of a general conflict of interest, or of unethical conduct or evidence showing a remote possibility of a violation of the state’s disciplinary rules of ethical conduct will not suffice. While the state’s disciplinary rules are often not binding in such matters, courts look to them as guidelines in determining whether an attorney’s conduct requires disqualification.

In Alaska, the process of attorney disqualification typically arises when there is a conflict of interest that could affect the attorney's ability to represent a client impartially. The party seeking disqualification must meet a high burden of proof, demonstrating with specificity why the attorney should be disqualified. General allegations of conflict or unethical behavior are insufficient; there must be clear evidence of a significant risk of a breach of ethical duties. Alaska courts may refer to the Alaska Rules of Professional Conduct for guidance, but these rules are not directly enforceable in disqualification proceedings. Instead, they serve as a benchmark to assess the attorney's conduct. The courts are cautious in granting disqualification because of the potential harm to the client's right to chosen counsel and the possible disruption to legal proceedings. Therefore, disqualification is considered a last resort, only to be applied when absolutely necessary to preserve the integrity of the legal process and the interests of justice.