Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Associations Keyed to Hamilton
Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corp. v. Wolfson
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
Wolfson (Plaintiff), Gerbert (Plaintiff), Kosow (Plaintiff), and Staub (Plaintiff), agents of Merritt-Chapman & Scott Corporation (MCS) (Defendant), were criminally charged on various counts of violating federal securities laws resulting from a plan to cause Defendant to secretly purchase hundreds of thousands of shares of its own common stock. Wolfson (Plaintiff) pleaded nolo contendere to a count of filing false annual reports and other charges were dropped upon a $10,000 fine and an 18-month suspended sentence; Gerbert (Plaintiff) agreed not to appeal his conviction of perjury before the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and was fined $2,000 with an 18-month suspended sentence. All other charges were dropped, including those against Kosow (Plaintiff) and Staub (Plaintiff). Each sought to be indemnified by MCS (Defendant) for the costs of their legal defense. Both sides moved for summary judgment, with Defendant arguing that no indemnification should be granted.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
- Policy: Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.
- Court Direction: Shares where the Court went from here for this case.