Maurice Healy recalled his "beautiful voice", which was sometimes compared to that of the great Russian singer Feodor Chaliapin: this, combined with a certain natural acting ability, made his arguments extraordinarily persuasive.

The old Court of Appeal has been described as probably the strongest judicial tribunal ever to exist in Ireland, due to the presence of such exceptional judges as Fitzgibbon himself, Hugh Holmes, Christopher Palles and Lord Ashbourne.

[7] Maurice Healy believed that FitzGibbon as a judge fell short of true greatness due to a certain lack of judicial impartiality, in that if he had a strong sympathy for one party to the appeal, he always found a way of deciding the case in their favour.

[8] On the other hand, Healy thought that the courtesy with which he conducted every appeal, and the deep interest he took in the legal arguments, made appearing in front of him "an intellectual treat".

[10] However he agrees with Healy that FitzGibbon, like Lord Ashbourne, was a pragmatist, who would always try to find in favour of the party he believed to have justice on their side, even if the precedents pointed the other way.

While the judgment on appeal aroused great indignation among trade unions, FitzGibbon, from the report of his summing up to the jury, seems to have stated the law (as it stood at the time) correctly.

[14] A good example of his judicial style can be found in Aaron's Reefs v Twiss,[15] where the Court of Appeal divided on the question of whether certain statements in a company's prospectus were simply "optimistic" or actually fraudulent.

His house, Kilrock,[19] on the Hill of Howth, was one of the centres of Dublin social life: here he entertained not only his legal colleagues, but many of the leading Irish and British politicians of the day.

[22] He was a member of the General Synod of the Church: he was called the most influential Protestant laymen of his time, and was rewarded with a statue in St. Patrick's Cathedral.

The next day the Lord Chief Justice of England in open court paid tribute to "that great judge, profound lawyer and man of wide and varied learning".

[29] The Times paid him an equally glowing tribute, describing him as a man whose gifts could have easily seen him rise to the top of the political rather than the judicial sphere.