Reading homework help

Write a Case Brief

Format for wring a case brief is given below (include all points mentioned below .One/two page. Not more than 2 pages.

 

TITLE AND VENUE: Identify the case name and citation in the correct format.

RULE OF LAW: A statement of the general principle of law that the case illustrates in the form of a statement.

Determining the rule of law of a case is a procedure similar to determining the issue of the case. Avoid being fooled by red herrings; there may be a few rules of law mentioned in the case excerpt, but usually only one is the rule with which the judges are most concerned. The techniques used to locate the issue, described below, may also be utilized to find the rule of law.

FACTS: A synopsis of only the essential relevant facts of the case, i.e. those bearing upon or leading up to the issue. The facts entry should be a short statement of the events that led one party to initiate legal proceedings against another in the first place. While some cases conveniently state the salient facts at the beginning of the decision, in other instances they will have to be culled from hiding places throughout the text, even from concurring and dissenting opinions. Some of the “facts” will often be in dispute and should be so noted. Conflicting evidence may be briefly pointed up. It is impossible to tell what is relevant until the entire case is read, as the ultimate determination of the rights and liabilities of the parties may turn on something buried deep in the opinion. The facts entry should seldom be longer than five sentences.

ISSUE: A statement of the general legal question answered by or illustrated in the case (Do not attempt to delve into procedural issues; just focus on the substantive legal issue). For clarity, the issue is best put in the form of a question capable of a yes or no answer. In reality, the issue is simply the Concise Rule of Law put in the form of a question.

The major problem presented in discerning what is the issue in the case is that an opinion usually purports to raise and answer several questions. However, except for rare cases, only one such question is really the issue in the case. Collateral issues not necessary to the resolution of the matter in controversy are handled by the court by language known as obiter dictum or merely dictum. While dicta may be included later in the brief, it has no place under the issue heading.

To find the issue, the student again asks who wants what and then goes on to ask why did that party succeed or fail in getting it. Once this is determined, the “why” should be turned into a question.

Since many issues are resolved by a court in coming to a final disposition of a case, you should focus on the portion of the opinion containing the issue or issues most relevant to the area of law under scrutiny. A noted law professor gave this advice: “Look at the case key or head notes”. It is also most important to remember to read the key or head notes at the beginning of a case to determine what the editors of the case reporter have gleaned from it.

OPINION AND DECISION: This section should succinctly explain the rationale of the court in arriving at its decision. In capsulizing the reasoning of the court, it should always include an application of the general rule or rules of law to the specific facts of the case. Hidden justifications come to light in this entry; the reasons for the state of the law, the public policies, the biases and prejudices, those considerations that influence the justices’ thinking and, ultimately, the outcome of the case. At the end, there should be a short indication of the disposition or procedural resolution of the case. You may wish to put this portion of the brief in outline form.

USE OF PRECEDENT: You should relate how the rule of law discernible from this case compares with that derived from earlier and later cases. Where does this case fit in the series of cases which has shaped the relevant portion of the law?

EFFECT ON BUSINESS AND SOCIETY:  You should briefly summarize the impact and effect that the ruling in the case will have on business and society.

REMEMBER THAT THE OPERATIVE WORD IS “BRIEF”.

This link will assist you in navigating the online library for legal research:  https://tamuc.libguides.com/mgt301

For further elucidation, check these links out:

http://www.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/research/brief.html

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html

 

EXAMPLE 1

Here is an example of an erudite and succinct case brief:

Talmage v. Smith, 101 Mich. 370, 45 Am. St. Rep. 414, 59 N.W. 656 (Mich. 1894).

Facts: Talmage (P) and several other children were playing on the roofs of sheds on Smith’s (D) property. Smith ordered the children to get down and threw a stick at one of the boys. The stick missed its intended target and struck Talmage in the eye. Talmage lost all sight in the eye and sued for battery to recover for personal injuries.

Evidence was offered showing that Smith threw the stick intending to frighten (i.e. assault) but not hit a different boy. The trial court entered judgment for Talmage and Smith appealed on the grounds that he did not have the intent to hit Talmage and was therefore not liable for battery.

Issue: If an actor intends to inflict an intentional tort upon one party and accidentally harms a second party, can the actor be held liable to the second party for battery?

Holding and Rule: Yes. If an actor intends to inflict an intentional tort upon one party and accidentally harms a second party, the actor can be held liable to the second party for battery under the doctrine of transferred intent.

If an actor intends an act against a party and that act impacts upon another the actor is liable for the injuries suffered. The fact that the injury resulted to a party other than was intended does not relieve the defendant from responsibility. Smith will not be relieved of liability because he intended to injure someone else.

Disposition: Affirmed.

Effect on Business and Society: The transferred intent torts under common law are: assault, battery, false imprisonment, trespass to land, and trespass to chattels. If an actor has the intent to commit any of the transferred intent torts, the actor will be liable for all other transferred intent torts that result from that act. The actor’s liability extends to all parties harmed, not merely the original intended victim.

Example 2

Title and Venue:

Dagley v. Thompson, Oct 8, 2003

Rehearing Overruled November 4 and 6,

2003. Court of Appeals of Texas,

Twelfth District, Tyler

 

Issue:

Can intoxicated driving cause comparative negligence and be a proximate cause of a motor vehicle accident? Is no-evidence summary judgement proper in such case?

 

 

 Facts:

On October 2, 1997 Kim Joseph Thompson was driving his 1995 Ford in U.S Highway 271 in Smith County, when he hit the right rear of the trailer being pulled by Dagley’s (defendant) 1993 Mack truck. Dagley was killed in a split second. Thompson’s family sued Dagley for his carelessness of neglecting the “Yield” sign on FM 757 and his inability to yield the right of way before entering the crossing. Dagley argued that Thompson was responsible for his own death as he was intoxicated at the time and had lack of coordination while driving.

 

 Rule of Law:

A no-evidence summary judgement is acquired if, after adequate time of discovery, there is no probative evidence of one or more essential elements of a claim of defense. The respondent has the initial burden to present sufficient evidence to defeat the no-evidence summary judgement motion. Negligence requires proof of proximate cause. Proximate cause requires proof as to both cause in fact and foreseeability.

 

Holding:

The appellate court reversed the no-evidence summary judgement of the trial court and remanded for a new trial with merits.

 

Opinion:

The court cited various cases, Hawkins v. Trinity Baptist Church , Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Rodriguez, to evaluate the legal sufficiency standards in applying the no evidence summary judgements. There was enough evidence to suggest that intoxication may be the probative cause for comparative negligence which could be the proximate cause for the accident. The court cited various other cases to make this point; Galveston-Houston Breweries, Inc. v. Naylor, El Chico Corp. v. Poole, Prudential Ins. Co. v. Jefferson Assoc. The appellate court ruled that the trial court made an error in granting plaintiff’s no-evidence motions of summary judgement and sustained the issues of Dagley.

 

Effects on Business and Society:

When court decide cases on no-summary judgement while a plethora of evidence is present, it shows injustice being delivered from a place where justice is demanded. The decision made by appellate court restores faith of society and businesses in the our “impartial” justice system.