Connection lost
Server error
Day v. Sidley & Austin Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A senior law partner resigned after a firm merger resulted in the loss of his sole chairmanship of an office. He sued the firm’s executive committee, but the court found the partnership agreement authorized the committee’s actions and dismissed all claims.
Legal Significance: A comprehensive partnership agreement can override default partnership law rules, granting a management committee broad authority over firm policy and structural changes, and limiting the scope of partners’ fiduciary duties regarding internal governance matters that do not involve self-dealing.
Day v. Sidley & Austin Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff J. Edward Day, a senior partner who founded the Washington D.C. office for the law firm Sidley & Austin (S&A), sued the firm’s executive committee after resigning. The committee had negotiated a merger with another firm, which Day and all other partners ultimately approved by signing the final agreements. Following the merger, the new management committee appointed Day as a co-chairman of the Washington office, a role he previously held alone, and decided to relocate the office over his objections. Day resigned, claiming these actions amounted to a constructive ouster. He alleged breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and fraud, arguing the committee concealed its plan to diminish his role and misrepresented that no partner would be ‘worse off’ from the merger. The S&A partnership agreement, which Day had signed, granted the executive committee broad authority over ‘all questions of Firm policy’ and stipulated that amendments and the admission of new partners required only a majority vote. The agreement contained no provision guaranteeing Day’s status as sole chairman.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a law firm’s executive committee breach its fiduciary or contractual duties to a partner by orchestrating a merger and altering that partner’s management role when the partnership agreement grants the committee broad authority over firm policy and allows for such changes by a majority vote?
No. The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, holding that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident,
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does a law firm’s executive committee breach its fiduciary or contractual duties to a partner by orchestrating a merger and altering that partner’s management role when the partnership agreement grants the committee broad authority over firm policy and allows for such changes by a majority vote?
Conclusion
The case is a leading authority on the power of a partnership Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo conseq
Legal Rule
The rights and duties of partners, as defined by default common law Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariat
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on the supremacy of the partnership agreement in Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A comprehensive partnership agreement can override default UPA rules, permitting major
