Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Walter v. Holiday Inns, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
985 F.2d 1232 (1993)


Facts

In 1979, Louis Walter and others (plaintiffs) formed a partnership with Holiday Inns, Inc. (defendant) to build a hotel and casino in New Jersey. Holiday had day-to-day control of the operations, but all major decisions rested with an executive committee controlled equally by the plaintiffs and Holiday. Construction costs exceeded projections and a financial projection for 1981 was bleak, projecting a negative cash flow. Holiday told the plaintiffs they needed to put up more money to fund capital and operational costs. In 1981, the plaintiffs sold 49% of their interest to Holiday. In 1983, the plaintiffs sold their remaining 1% interest to Holiday. Around 1982, the hotel and casino became very profitable. The plaintiffs brought suit for breach of fiduciary duty, alleging that Holiday failed to disclose certain material information the plaintiffs needed to negotiate a fair buy out. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Holiday should have provided them with the Boxer Report, which was a 35-year financial projection for the casino based on raw data from partnership financial information. The report projected significant profits over the long term. The plaintiffs stipulated that they were sophisticated investors. Further, at all relevant times, the plaintiffs had unrestricted access to the partnership’s books and accounts. The district court granted Holiday’s motion for judgment as a matter of law. Walter appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Sloviter, C.J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

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 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read 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. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.