Terry Christensen, the most powerful Hollywood attorney to be indicted to date in the Anthony Pellicano wiretapping investigation in L.A., has taken an unusual tact: He's hired the lawyer most likely to testify against him—his partner—to work on his own legal team.

The idea is that, as his attorney, she can't testify against her client. But in a court motion obtained by Radar, the prosecutors are attempting to pry apart Christensen and his attorney, Patricia Glaser—both founding partners since 1988 of the powerful Hollywood firm Christensen, Glaser, Fink, Jacobs, Weil & Shapiro. They want her thrown off the case for what they call a clear conflict of interest.

In the motion, the government says Glaser, herself, previously retained Pellicano—his computer's address book contained "back-to-back" entries for Glaser, one of which just happened to be her home telephone number. And they say she knows about Christensen, the big fish in this investigation, using the felonious PI.

Back in February 2006, Christensen was indicted by a federal grand jury for allegedly paying Pellicano $100,000 to illegally wiretap the ex-wife of 87-year-old billionaire and former MGM honcho Kirk Kerkorian. Kerkorian and Lisa Bonder Kerkorian, a former pro tennis player, were neck deep in a bitter dispute over child support. At the time, Glaser predictably backed up Christensen, claiming that "Terry's only involvement with Pellicano was brief and completely justified. Terry was acting to protect a client and a child from repeated death threats and extortion." She also scoffed at the notion that prosecutors were investigating her own involvement in the Pellicano scrum thusly: "Absolutely not. Oh my lord."

The motion detailing her connection Pellicano and the government's interest in it seems to prove otherwise. If prosecutors do pry apart Christensen and Glaser, it would seem to be the first step in a legal version of divide-and-conquer. Question is, in a case that has hinted at all manner of nastiness and lawbreaking by the Hollywood elite, who would be the next in line to fall?

This is not the first time Ms. Glaser's questionable ethics have put her in a tight spot. Seven years ago, a lawyer representing two women who had sued her client, TV's Bob Barker, for sexual harassment, put Glaser on the stand under oath, where she was forced to admit that she had previously been disqualified from a case, apparently for being less than forthright in her original statements to the judge in that case.

Neither Christensen nor Glaser immediately returned calls and e-mails seeking comment.