Gibbs v. Breed, Abbott & Morgan

710 N.Y.S.2d 578 (2000)

From our private database of 46,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Gibbs v. Breed, Abbott & Morgan

New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
710 N.Y.S.2d 578 (2000)

  • Written by Casey Cohen, JD
Play video

Facts

Charles Gibbs and Robert Sheehan (plaintiffs), were partners in the trusts and estates department of the law firm Breed, Abbott & Morgan (Breed) (defendant). Gibbs was head of Breed’s trusts and estates department, and became dissatisfied with the firm. Gibbs began interviewing with new law firms. Gibbs approached Sheehan and persuaded Sheehan to join him in moving to a new law firm. Gibbs and Sheehan held joint interviews with prospective firms. Eventually, Gibbs and Sheehan told the firm’s presiding partner that they had accepted offers to join the firm of Chadbourne & Park (Chadbourne). A few days later, Gibbs and Sheehan sent Chadbourne a memo listing the names, salaries, billable hours, education, and other information about the firm’s trusts and estates department. Sheehan had prepared the list prior to notifying the firm of his plans to leave the firm. The memo was intended to assist in recruiting other Breed associates to Chadbourne. In the weeks following Gibbs’s and Sheehan’s resignations, Chadbourne made employment offers to several employees from the firm’s trusts and estates department. Gibbs and Sheehan sued Breed to recover money due under the firm’s partnership agreement. The firm filed a counterclaim alleging that Gibbs and Sheehan breached their fiduciary duty to the firm’s partnership. The trial court found that Gibbs and Sheehan, in planning and implementing their withdrawal from the firm, breached their fiduciary duty to the partnership. The trial court assessed $1.8 million in damages, and Gibbs and Sheehan appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Mazzarelli, J.)

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 745,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,100 briefs, keyed to 987 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 745,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,100 briefs - keyed to 987 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership