Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Keywell Corporation v. Piper & Marbury, LLP

1999 WL 66700 (1999)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,400+ case briefs...

Keywell Corporation v. Piper & Marbury, LLP

United States District Court for the Western District of New York

1999 WL 66700 (1999)

Facts

Keywell Corporation (plaintiff) hired the law firm Piper & Marbury, LLP (Piper) (defendant) to represent it in the purchase of a steel-recycling facility. Piper retained an environmental-consulting firm to perform an environmental audit of the property. Relying on false representations from the seller that there had been no on-site waste disposal, the consulting firm limited its investigation, and the environmental audit failed to uncover significant hazardous-waste contamination. Piper’s audit report to Keywell underestimated the potential environmental liabilities, which were largely assumed by Keywell in the purchase agreement. After the sale, a grand jury investigation uncovered significant groundwater contamination that had not been discovered in the audit, subjecting Keywell to $6 million in cleanup-cost liability. Keywell sued Piper for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty in federal district court. Piper moved for summary judgment on the ground that Keywell could not adduce evidence to prove causation and damages. Specifically, Piper asserted that Keywell could not demonstrate that but for Piper’s alleged misconduct, Keywell would have either walked away or negotiated a better deal. Piper argued that Keywell could not prove (1) that the seller would have agreed to renegotiate; (2) that Keywell would have discovered the contamination with a more extensive investigation; or (3) that Keywell would have found an alternative site to purchase. Keywell responded with (1) an affidavit stating that the seller would have been willing to renegotiate the purchase agreement had the contamination been timely discovered; (2) evidence that the seller had serious cash-flow problems at the time of the purchase negotiation; and (3) evidence that the contamination would have been discovered with due diligence.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Elfvin, 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 617,000 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 617,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,400 briefs, keyed to 984 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 617,000 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
  • 35,400 briefs - keyed to 984 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