Pamela Kemp brought an interlocutory appeal from an order disqualifying her lawyer in ongoing litigation. The Court of Appeals held that the disqualification ruling was premature because the trial court had not adequately resolved the factual and legal questions that had to precede removal of counsel. A disqualification decision requires more than conclusory allegations; the court must develop a record concerning the relationship, the alleged conflict, and the applicable professional-responsibility standard. Although the trial court had conducted a hearing, the appellate record did not permit a reliable determination of the precursor issues. The Court of Appeals therefore vacated the order and remanded for further proceedings, noting that an evidentiary hearing might be appropriate to resolve the disputed facts. The court did not decide whether Kemp’s lawyer should ultimately be disqualified. One judge concurred, while the chief judge concurred in the judgment only.