Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Friedman v. Hartmann

United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
787 F. Supp. 411 (S.D.N.Y. 1992)


Facts

Friedman and other investors (plaintiffs) entered into an agreement with Hartmann (defendant) to invest in the purchase and development of commercial properties in Connecticut. One such property was to become a shopping center. The plaintiffs invested $600,000 to buy the property, and the purchase agreement said that no broker had been involved in the deal. However, the plaintiffs claim that Hartmann and various developers involved in the transaction (defendants) kept secret the fact that they had signed a deal with a broker that would require the payment of a $1 million commission at closing. The plaintiffs sued the defendants to recoup their $600,000 investment under various theories, including fraud and misrepresentation, breach of contract, and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-68. The defendants impleaded their attorney, Kathy Priest, her law firm, and James O’Connor (third-party defendants). The defendants claimed that the third-party defendants had committed malpractice by advising the defendants that there was no need to disclose the broker’s commission. As such, the defendants claimed a right of contribution and indemnification from the third-party defendants for the claims against it under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 14(a), as well as asserting independent claims for negligence and breach of contract. The third-party defendants filed a FRCP 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Leisure, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 222,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.