Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Stratagem Development Corp. v. Heron International N.V. Case Brief

District Court, S.D. New York1991Docket #923373
756 F. Supp. 789 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1474 1991 WL 18083 Professional Responsibility Civil Procedure Corporations

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

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: A law firm attempted to sue the parent company of a current client. The court disqualified the firm, holding it could not cure the conflict by dropping the existing client “like a hot potato” once the conflict became apparent.

Legal Significance: This case establishes that a firm cannot unilaterally convert a current client into a former client to avoid the strict per se rule against concurrent adverse representation. The duty of undivided loyalty requires disqualification absent informed consent from both clients.

Stratagem Development Corp. v. Heron International N.V. 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

The law firm Epstein Becker & Green (“Epstein Becker”) represented Stratagem Development Corp. (“Stratagem”) in its real estate dealings. Simultaneously, the firm represented Fidelity Services Corporation (“FSC”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Heron Properties, Inc. (“Heron”), in unrelated labor matters. A dispute arose between Stratagem and Heron, leading Heron to terminate their joint venture agreement. Epstein Becker then informed FSC of its intent to sue Heron on behalf of Stratagem. In a letter, the firm stated, “Unless we hear otherwise from you, we plan to resign as Heron’s counsel… on the day we file Stratagem’s complaint.” FSC’s parent, Heron, objected, citing a conflict of interest. Epstein Becker then sent a letter stating it was withdrawing as counsel for FSC. Subsequently, Epstein Becker filed a complaint against Heron on behalf of Stratagem. On the same day, an Epstein Becker attorney sent a letter to the Second Circuit identifying the firm as counsel for FSC in the ongoing labor matter. The firm did not transfer the FSC case files to new counsel until after the complaint against Heron was filed. Heron moved to disqualify Epstein Becker.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Can a law firm avoid disqualification for a breach of the duty of loyalty by withdrawing from its representation of a current client in order to pursue litigation against that client’s parent company on behalf of another client?

Yes, the firm must be disqualified. The court held that Epstein Becker 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 c

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

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

Can a law firm avoid disqualification for a breach of the duty of loyalty by withdrawing from its representation of a current client in order to pursue litigation against that client’s parent company on behalf of another client?

Conclusion

This case reinforces the 'hot potato' rule, establishing that a firm's duty Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut e

Legal Rule

When a law firm engages in representation adverse to a current client, 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 pa

Legal Analysis

The court's analysis centered on the duty of undivided loyalty under Canon 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 elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitat

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • A law firm violates its duty of loyalty by suing 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 cupid

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More