Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Spencer
American Roller Co., LLC v. Foster-Adams Leasing, LLP
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:
American Roller Co., LLC (Plaintiff), contracted to buy Champion Roller, LLC (Champion) from Russell M. Foster, Larry H. Adams, Foster-Adams Leasing, LLP, and Foster-Adams LLP (Defendants). CM Acquisitions (CM), an investor in Plaintiff’s parent company, acted as guarantor. CM negotiated the purchase of Pillar Industries by Pillar Induction, in which it is also an investor. Plaintiff sued Defendants for misrepresentation and breach of warranty. Defendants counterclaimed for payments already due. During discovery Defendants sought information related to the settlement of a dispute between CM and Pillar Industries, even though neither was a party. Defendants argued Plaintiff habitually bought companies and then sued in bad faith to get better terms. Specifically, Defendants hoped to depose the former president of Pillar Industries, Mark Skiba, in order to find evidence of Plaintiff’s business practices and motivations for suing. Defendants thought such discovery could provide grounds for further claims against Plaintiff. Plaintiff sought to block the discovery on the ground that the Pillar transaction was not relevant, because Skiba had no involvement with Plaintiff or Champion, nor did Pillar Industries. Plaintiff asked the court for a protective order prohibiting discovery related to the Pillar deal.
- 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.