Civil Procedure Keyed to Mueller
Jane Doe v. Schwerzler
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:
On August 1, 2006, Jane Doe (plaintiff) filed a complaint in federal district court in New Jersey against John Schwerzler, Robert Taffet, Trish Green, Daniel Green, and the Gloucester County Institute of Technology (defendants), alleging violations of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination. Doe contended that Schwerzler, her former swim coach, had commenced an improper sexual relationship with her lasting from 1998, when she was 13, until 2004. The other defendants were alleged to be liable for conduct relating to the relationship. All defendants apart from Schwerzler moved to dismiss Doe’s case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. The moving defendants were all citizens of New Jersey, where Doe had grown up and her parents continued to reside. On the date she filed her complaint, however, Doe was living in Kentucky, where she attended college. Doe provided evidence that, as of that date, she had registered to vote in Kentucky, acquired a Kentucky driver’s license, rented property and paid utilities in Kentucky, established a bank account there, and paid Kentucky state taxes. Doe also offered evidence in the form of statements by herself, friends, and family members of her intent to remain in Kentucky. The court considered the motion to dismiss.
- 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.