Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Hazard
Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Crenshaw
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:
Lloyd Crenshaw (Plaintiff) accidentally dropped a car alternator on his foot while performing work on a workbench. After attempting to treat the wound himself, he visited a local hospital and, after several visits, was diagnosed with a condition requiring amputation below the knee. After his amputation, Plaintiff made a claim with his insurer, Bankers Life & Casualty (Defendant) for $20,000, the amount allowed by the policy. Defendant denied the claim, stating that Plaintiff’s amputation was caused by a pre-existing condition and not the incident with the alternator. Plaintiff contested this claim, corresponding with Defendant extensively. After several months, Plaintiff sued Defendant in Mississippi state court, seeking $20,000 in actual damages and $1,635,000 in punitive damages for the tort of bad-faith refusal to pay an insurance claim. The jury found for Plaintiff and awarded $20,000 in actual damages and $1.6 million in punitive damages. Defendant appealed to the Mississippi Supreme Court, which affirmed the jury verdict in its entirety. Defendant then filed a motion for rehearing, arguing for the first time “[t]he punitive damage verdict . . . constitutes excessive fine [sic], and violates constitutional principles.” The Mississippi Supreme Court denied the petition for rehearing. Defendant appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
- 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.