Farber v. Servan Land Co. Case Brief

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit1981Docket #66190969
662 F.2d 371

Complete case briefs with LSD+

Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.

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

4 min read

tl;dr: Corporate directors purchased land adjacent to the corporation’s golf course, an opportunity previously discussed by stockholders. The court found this a breach of fiduciary duty, holding them liable for profits despite a later, arguably beneficial, joint sale.

Legal Significance: This case reinforces the corporate opportunity doctrine, clarifying that directors cannot usurp opportunities in the corporation’s line of business and that subsequent benefits or interested-director ratification do not cure the breach.

Farber v. Servan Land Co. 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

Servan Land Company, Inc. (the corporation) operated a golf course. Its stockholders, including plaintiff Farber, had discussed acquiring 160 acres of abutting land suitable for expansion. At a 1968 stockholders’ meeting, the possibility of purchasing this land was discussed favorably, with a suggestion to use proceeds from refinancing to fund it. Shortly thereafter, two directors and majority stockholders, Serianni (President) and Savin (Vice President), purchased the 160 acres in their individual capacities. They did not formally present this specific opportunity to the corporation for a vote before their purchase. Later, the corporation’s assets and the directors’ 160 acres were sold as a package. Farber initiated a derivative suit, alleging the directors preempted a corporate opportunity. The directors argued the corporation had no interest, rejected the opportunity, and that their purchase was ratified by stockholders (excluding Farber) and ultimately benefited the corporation through the package sale.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Did the corporate directors breach their fiduciary duty by purchasing land adjacent to the corporation’s property when the corporation had an interest in and reasonable expectancy of acquiring that land, thereby usurping a corporate opportunity?

Yes, the directors breached their fiduciary duties by usurping a corporate opportunity. 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 eius

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

About IRAC analysis

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.

Legal Issue

Did the corporate directors breach their fiduciary duty by purchasing land adjacent to the corporation’s property when the corporation had an interest in and reasonable expectancy of acquiring that land, thereby usurping a corporate opportunity?

Conclusion

This case serves as a strong precedent affirming the stringent fiduciary duties 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 co

Legal Rule

A corporate director or officer occupies a quasi-fiduciary relation to the corporation 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, s

Legal Analysis

The court determined that a corporate opportunity existed based on several factors 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 exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Directors breached fiduciary duty by usurping a corporate opportunity to buy
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 dolor

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial