Gilberg v. Barbieri
New York Court of Appeals
53 N.Y.2d 285, 441 N.Y.S.2d 49, 423 N.E.2d 807 (1981)
- Written by Steven Pacht, JD
Facts
David Gilberg (plaintiff) was an attorney who represented the former wife of Joseph Barbieri (defendant). Gilberg and Barbieri engaged in a physical altercation after an aborted deposition of Barbieri, leading Gilberg to file a criminal information in city court accusing Barbieri of harassment. The city court conducted a short, nonjury trial. Immediately after the trial, the city court found Barbieri guilty of using physical force against Gilberg but advised Barbieri that he was not guilty of a crime but rather a violation, which was less serious than a misdemeanor. The city court sentenced Barbieri to a one-year conditional discharge. The next day, Gilberg commenced a civil suit against Barbieri for assault, in which Gilberg sought $250,000 in damages. Gilberg moved for summary judgment with respect to liability, arguing that Barbieri was collaterally estopped from denying liability due to Barbieri’s city-court harassment conviction. The trial court granted Gilberg’s motion, ruling that the city court found that Barbieri used physical force against Gilberg and that Barbieri had a full and fair opportunity to litigate that issue in the city court. The appellate division affirmed. Barbieri appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wachtler, J.)
Dissent (Meyer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.