Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Hazard
Csohan v. United Benefit Life Insurance Co.
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:
Csohan (Plaintiff), a resident of San Diego, California, filed an action in the Court of Common Pleas for Cuyahoga County in January 1984 against the United Benefit Life Insurance Company (Defendant). The suit sought a payment of $5,000 from a life insurance policy held by Plaintiff’s father. The parties did not dispute that the policy was in force and that the death had occurred. Two months after the Ohio suit was initiated, Defendant interpleaded in a suit between Betty Csohan, the decedent’s wife, and United of Omaha Insurance Company. The case was being heard in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County. In response to the interpleader, Plaintiff filed a motion for a restraining order in Ohio court, seeking to enjoin Defendant from continuing with its action in California. In response, Defendant argued that it was willing to pay whichever member of the Csohan family was the proper beneficiary of the insurance policy, but it was not willing to pay twice. Defendant further argued that while the Ohio court had jurisdiction in the instant case, the California courts had jurisdiction over both Csohans, making it important to litigate there. The Ohio court disagreed, and enjoined Defendant from continuing its participation in the California action. Defendant appealed.
- 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.