William M. Joel, Professionally Known as Billy Joel v. Francis X. Weber (Action No. 1) Frank Management, Inc. v. Christie B. Joel (Action No. 2)
New York Supreme Court
153 Misc. 2d 549, 581 N.Y.S.2d 579 (1992)
- Written by Sarah Holley, JD
Facts
Francis Weber was the brother of Billy Joel’s former wife. Billy Joel (plaintiff) sued Weber and Frank Management, Inc. (FMI) (defendants) seeking a declaration that the termination of an agreement under which FMI served as manager of Joel’s business and personal affairs (the agreement) was valid based on allegations that FMI, through Weber as its president, committed fraud in handling Joel’s finances. In a subsequent consolidated action, FMI (plaintiff) sued Joel’s then-current wife, Christie Brinkley Joel (defendant), alleging Brinkley had “wrongfully, knowingly, intentionally, maliciously and without reasonable justification or excuse, induce[d], persuade[d] and entice[d] . . . Joel to violate, repudiate, and break” the agreement, resulting in $11 million worth of damage to FMI. No facts were alleged to support FMI’s complaint other than an assertion that Brinkley harbored ill feelings toward FMI as a result of Weber’s involvement in the negotiation and execution of an antenuptial agreement between Brinkley and Joel. Brinkley filed a motion to dismiss FMI’s complaint against her, arguing that as Joel’s wife she had absolute immunity against a claim of tortiously interfering with a contract between her spouse and a third party.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Lehner, 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.
