Order Description
You are a young associate at a law firm in New York City. One day, a partner at the firm, Jerry Painter, comes to you with an assignment.

Kyle Connaughton, a new client, has asked the firm for advice on whether he would be successful in an appeal of a decision that he recently lost in the Appellate Division, First Department. In the case, Connaughton v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., 2016 NY Slip. Op. 00273, the majority of the court upheld the trial court’s dismissal of Connaughton’s complaint.

Jerry instructs you to write a memo analyzing the decision. The majority, as noted, thought that Connaughton’s complaint should be dismissed. There was a dissent, however, which would have overturned the dismissal and allowed the case to go forward.

Jerry reminds you that, because Connaughton was an at will employee, he could be fired at any time for any reason as long as the firing was not for a reason prohibited by law, such as discrimination. He also reminds you that the appeal involves a motion to dismiss the complaint, so you must assume that the facts alleged by Connaughton are true.

Jerry indicates that you should address the following:

1. Compare and contrast the majority and dissenting opinions regarding whether or not Connaughton has made sufficient allegations about damages in order to proceed to trial. You should include a discussion of their views about pleading “nominal damages.”

2. Consider the societal and business implications that may ensue if plaintiffs are required to plead “actual pecuniary loss as a direct result of the wrong“ (majority opinion) versus pleading a “reasonably favorable inference” of damages (dissenting opinion)?

3. Is the dissent correct in its conclusion that Connaughton has alleged sufficient facts to go to trial on the issue of the existence of a confidential or fiduciary relationship created by “superior knowledge,” particularly given defendants’ argument that Connaughton could have discovered the undisclosed facts through “ordinary intelligence”?

General Instructions:
Your memo should be no more than 5 pages, double-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman type, with one inch margins. It should address and resolve the issues set forth above.

Memo Format:
Introduction (includes framing the legal issues & brief factual summary)
Analysis/Discussion – includes your legal reasoning
Conclusion

References:
You must provide citations for all sources, but once you cite a source, you may simply refer to it again by a shortened version of the name. Use endnotes rather than cite in text or in footnotes, but use the name of any case in the text. The page or pages of endnotes will not count against the five-page limit.

You should not perform any research. You should only cite to cases included in this assignment. The news articles are provided for background information and to prompt your thinking, not for citation. You can assume that all the legal materials are valid law in New York State; i.e., that they accurately state New York law.

Your memorandum will be evaluated on the criteria set forth in the Course Syllabus: Structure/Format, Clarity, Legal Reasoning, Argument and Creativity.

Sources:

Complaint, Connaughton v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. Supreme Court, New York County, Index No. 155106/2013

Lama Holding Co. v. Smith Barney, 88 N.Y.2d 413 (1996)

Black v. Chittenden, 69 N.Y.2d 665 (1986)

Caruso, Caruso & Branda, P.C. v. Hirsch, 41 A.D.3d 407 (2d Dept. 2007)
(see attached)

Order Description
You are a young associate at a law firm in New York City. One day, a partner at the firm, Jerry Painter, comes to you with an assignment.

Kyle Connaughton, a new client, has asked the firm for advice on whether he would be successful in an appeal of a decision that he recently lost in the Appellate Division, First Department. In the case, Connaughton v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., 2016 NY Slip. Op. 00273, the majority of the court upheld the trial court’s dismissal of Connaughton’s complaint.

Jerry instructs you to write a memo analyzing the decision. The majority, as noted, thought that Connaughton’s complaint should be dismissed. There was a dissent, however, which would have overturned the dismissal and allowed the case to go forward.

Jerry reminds you that, because Connaughton was an at will employee, he could be fired at any time for any reason as long as the firing was not for a reason prohibited by law, such as discrimination. He also reminds you that the appeal involves a motion to dismiss the complaint, so you must assume that the facts alleged by Connaughton are true.

Jerry indicates that you should address the following:

1. Compare and contrast the majority and dissenting opinions regarding whether or not Connaughton has made sufficient allegations about damages in order to proceed to trial. You should include a discussion of their views about pleading “nominal damages.”

2. Consider the societal and business implications that may ensue if plaintiffs are required to plead “actual pecuniary loss as a direct result of the wrong“ (majority opinion) versus pleading a “reasonably favorable inference” of damages (dissenting opinion)?

3. Is the dissent correct in its conclusion that Connaughton has alleged sufficient facts to go to trial on the issue of the existence of a confidential or fiduciary relationship created by “superior knowledge,” particularly given defendants’ argument that Connaughton could have discovered the undisclosed facts through “ordinary intelligence”?

General Instructions:
Your memo should be no more than 5 pages, double-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman type, with one inch margins. It should address and resolve the issues set forth above.

Memo Format:
Introduction (includes framing the legal issues & brief factual summary)
Analysis/Discussion – includes your legal reasoning
Conclusion

References:
You must provide citations for all sources, but once you cite a source, you may simply refer to it again by a shortened version of the name. Use endnotes rather than cite in text or in footnotes, but use the name of any case in the text. The page or pages of endnotes will not count against the five-page limit.

You should not perform any research. You should only cite to cases included in this assignment. The news articles are provided for background information and to prompt your thinking, not for citation. You can assume that all the legal materials are valid law in New York State; i.e., that they accurately state New York law.

Your memorandum will be evaluated on the criteria set forth in the Course Syllabus: Structure/Format, Clarity, Legal Reasoning, Argument and Creativity.

Sources:

Complaint, Connaughton v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. Supreme Court, New York County, Index No. 155106/2013

Lama Holding Co. v. Smith Barney, 88 N.Y.2d 413 (1996)

Black v. Chittenden, 69 N.Y.2d 665 (1986)

Caruso, Caruso & Branda, P.C. v. Hirsch, 41 A.D.3d 407 (2d Dept. 2007)
(see attached)