Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Marcus
Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.
ProfessorBrittany L. Raposa
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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:
In March, 1947, Appellee filed a petition for the settlement of its first accounting, thus foreclosing any beneficiary from bringing an action for negligent management of the trust fund for the period covered by the settlement. In compliance with state law, Appellee published notice of the action on four occasions, listing the name and address of the trust company, the name and date of creation of the common trust fund, and a list of all included funds. The names of the beneficiaries were not included in the advertisements. Further, Appellee did not attempt any other method of personal service upon the beneficiaries, either resident or non-resident. Counsel for the beneficiaries (Appellant) made an appearance to object to the lack of personal jurisdiction. The United States Court of Appeals of New York overruled the objections that the statutory notice contravenes the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- 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.