Legal Opinion
Graubard Mollen Dannett & Horowitz v. Moskovitz
New York Court of Appeals
Decided July 6, 1995PublishedCited by 108 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Chief Judge Kaye.
This appeal focuses on a modern-day law firm fixture: the revolving door. With charges of faithless deserting partners and countercharges of a vindictive abandoned firm, the key question becomes whether departing partners can "solicit” clients of the firm. Here we decide only that plaintiff law firm’s allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract and fraud are sufficient to withstand summary dismissal, which was the conclusion also reached by the trial court and Appellate Division.
The following factual account is drawn largely from the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Meinhard v. SalmonNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Merritt Hill Vineyards Inc. v. Windy Heights Vineyard, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Channel Master Corp. v. Aluminium Limited Sales, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1958
- Hecht v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Sabo v. DelmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1957
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by108 opinions
- 511 West 232nd Owners Corp. v. Jennifer Realty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
- Dowd & Dowd, Ltd. v. GleasonIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
- Dowd and Dowd, Ltd. v. GleasonAppellate Court of Illinois · 2004
- Geron ex rel. Estate of Thelen LLP v. Seyfarth Shaw LLP (In re Thelen LLP)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
- Richbell Information Services, Inc. v. Jupiter Partners, L.P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
103 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.