Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Spencer
Del Vecchio v. Conseco, 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:
Elio Del Vecchio (Plaintiff) traded in a $5,000 whole life insurance policy for a $10,000 universal life policy, believing he could do so at no cost. Plaintiff sued Conseco, Inc., Bankers National Life Insurance Company, and Great American Reserve Insurance Policy (Defendants) for fraud under Indiana law on behalf of himself and other purchasers. Del Veccio claimed the federal court had diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, because diversity of citizenship existed and the amount in controversy for all plaintiffs was greater than $75,000. Defendants moved for summary judgment on the ground that Del Veccio’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations. The court granted the motion, and Plaintiff appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit questioned the validity of federal jurisdiction and requested supplemental briefings on the issue. In his supplemental briefing, Plaintiff asserted that punitive damages were available and the amount in controversy requirement was therefore satisfied.
- 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.