Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Mueller
FM Industries, Inc. v. Citicorp Credit Services, Inc
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:
FM Industries, Inc. (FM) (plaintiff) published computer software whose copyright FM later registered. Prior to registration, FM licensed the software to Citicorp Credit Services, Inc. (Citicorp) (defendant). After a dispute over fees, FM sued Citicorp for infringing its copyright. FM also sued the Law Offices of Ross Gelfand, LLC (defendant), Citicorp’s outside counsel, for continuing to use the software after the license was terminated. Through its attorney Wayne Rhine, FM sought more than $15 billion in statutory damages and $235 million in actual damages. FM sought to depose Citicorp’s chairman despite there being no link between the chairman and the lawsuit. FM filed discovery demands on a number of nonparty law firms without complying with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 45. FM missed numerous discovery deadlines, yet sought $815 million in sanctions against the defendants when they missed a single deadline by one day. The district court dismissed FM’s claims for damages, because (1) its late registration date made statutory damages unavailable and (2) FM had not proven actual damages. Other claims were set for trial. When attorney Rhine was tasked, pursuant to federal and local rules, to prepare a pretrial order, he flouted the obligation repeatedly. After Rhine failed to prepare an adequate draft upon the court’s admonition, the court dismissed FM’s claims. FM moved for reconsideration but did not proceed to work on the pretrial order. Eleven weeks later, the court ordered FM to pay the defendants’ attorneys’ fees. The court held Rhine personally liable for approximately $37,500 in attorneys’ fees attributable to his vexatious proliferation of proceedings. The court also held another attorney who had been retained to assist in the case, William McGrath, jointly and severally liable for most of the fees charged to Rhine. FM 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.