Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Cross
Beneficial National Bank v. Anderson
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:
Plaintiffs, twenty-six taxpayers, exchanged information regarding their expected tax refunds from short-term loans from Defendant, Beneficial National Bank. Thereafter, Plaintiffs initiated this action against Defendant, a national bank that is chartered under the National Bank Act, and two defendants in Alabama state court. Plaintiffs contend that their interest rates violated state usury laws. Plaintiffs complaint did not reference federal law. Nonetheless, all defendants removed the case to federal court on the grounds that the National Bank Act indicates the interest rates, which provided the applicable remedies available for the violations. Also, defendants assert the case is removable, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. Plaintiffs motioned for a remand, but the court denied Plaintiff’s motion. Subsequently, the court certified the question of whether removal, in this case, is proper to the appellate court. The appellate court reversed the district court and held that the claim did not arise under federal law, pursuant to the well-pleaded complaint rule nor did the claim fall into the complete preemption doctrine exception. Thereafter, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the circuit split.
- 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.