Stratagem Development Corp. v. Heron International N.V.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
756 F. Supp. 789 (1991)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
The law firm Epstein, Becker & Green (Epstein) represented Stratagem Development Corp. (Stratagem) (plaintiff) in connection with a joint venture with Heron International N.V. (Heron) (defendant). At that time, Epstein also represented a wholly owned subsidiary of Heron, Fidelity Service Corporation (FSC), in connection with labor disputes. After Heron terminated the joint-venture agreement with Stratagem, Epstein notified Heron that Epstein intended to file an action against Heron on behalf of Stratagem and resign from the representation of FSC in the labor-dispute matters. Heron responded that it would be a violation of the New York Code of Professional Responsibility for Epstein to file a suit against Heron. Epstein took the position that there was no conflict in its continued representation of Stratagem. After a further exchange of letters, Baer Marks & Upham advised Epstein that it would be assuming the representation of FSC. Epstein sent the FSC files to Baer Marks & Upham the same day that Heron’s counsel advised the court it would be seeking Epstein’s disqualification. A substitution-of-counsel form was sent but never filed. Shortly after Epstein filed the complaint against Heron, Heron moved to disqualify Epstein from representing Stratagem.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kram, 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.