Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Cross
Friedman v. Hartmann
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:
Friedman and other investors (collectively known as “Plaintiff’s) made an agreement with Hartmann, Defendant, to invest in the expansion of commercial properties in Connecticut. One of the properties was supposed to be a shopping center. Plaintiffs invested $600,000 to buy the property. Upon purchase, the agreement stated that there was not a broker involved in the deal. Nonetheless, Plaintiffs’ allege that Defendant and various developers were actually involved in the transaction. However, it was kept a secret to Plaintiffs that a broker was involved because, had it be disclosed, Plaintiff would be required to pay $1 million commission at closing. Plaintiffs brought suit against Defendant to reclaim their $600,000 investment alleging fraud and misrepresentation, breach of contract, and violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Defendants impleaded their attorney, Kathy Priest, Priest’s law firm, and James O’Connor (collectively known as “third party defendants”). Defendant’s alleged that third-party defendants committed malpractice by advising Defendants they did not need to disclose the broker’s commission to Plaintiff. Further, Defendant alleged they have a right to contribution and indemnification from the third party defendants. The third-party defendants motioned to dismiss the case alleging Defendants failed to state a claim on which relief can 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.