Simpson v. Ernst & Young

850 F. Supp. 648 (1994)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
S
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Simpson v. Ernst & Young

United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
850 F. Supp. 648 (1994)

SC
Play video

Facts

Ernst & Young (defendant) named Simpson (plaintiff) a partner for the firm. Simpson contributed $84,000 to the firm via a bank loan that Ernst & Young arranged and on which Ernst & Young paid the interest. Ernst & Young paid Simpson an annual salary, plus an annual allocation as determined by a compensation committee. There was nothing in the partnership agreement that tied that allocation amount to the business’s profits or losses. Simpson did not have the power to vote for new partners or the removal of existing partners. Simpson could vote for amendments to the partnership agreement, firm dissolution, and mergers, but the firm’s advisory council could override the results of any such vote. Simpson did not have an unconditional right to examine the firm’s books and records. Under the terms of his partnership, Simpson was subject to unlimited liability for the firm’s losses. Ernst & Young fired Simpson. Ernst & Young refused to permit Simpson to examine the firm’s books regarding its attorney’s opinion about his firing. Simpson brought suit for age discrimination under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Ernst & Young filed a motion for summary judgment on the ground that Simpson was a partner and thus not covered by federal statutes protecting the rights of employees.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Steinberg, 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 802,000 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 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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 802,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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

Casebooks

Business Associations

Key Terms