Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Cound
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc
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:
Carto, a publisher, and the Respondent, Liberty Lobby (Respondent), the organization Carto headed, filed a libel suit against The Investigator magazine, its president and its publisher, the Jack Anderson (Petitioner). The Respondent accused the Petitioner of publishing articles portraying the Respondent as a neo-Nazi organization. Petitioner moved for summary judgment on the basis that Respondent was a public figure and no actual malice on the part of the Petitioner could be proven. The trial court granted the motion. On appeal, the Respondent argued that for purposes of opposing the summary judgment motion, the trial court required it to show that actual malice existed by a clear and convincing standard, rather than by a preponderance of the evidence standard. The Court Appeals held that a reasonable jury could conclude actual malice could have been used and that it was irrelevant on a motion for summary judgment what the actual standard was.
- 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.