Civil Procedure Keyed to Yeazell
Rush v. City of Maple Heights
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:
The Plaintiff, Lenore Rush (Plaintiff), was riding on a motorcycle with her husband on a public roadway through the Defendant, the City of Maple Heights (Defendant). Plaintiff was thrown off their motorcycle and hit a pothole. Plaintiff, the owner of the cycle, sued the Defendant for damages to the machine in the amount of $1,000. Plaintiff prevailed in the municipal court finding that the Defendant was negligent in not repairing the road and that the negligence was the proximate cause of the accident. That judgment was affirmed by the Ohio Court of Appeals and the Ohio Supreme Court. Plaintiff then sued Defendant for disabling spinal injuries suffered in the same accident seeking damages of $1.5 million. Plaintiff sought to invoke preclusion on the issue of City’s negligence and the trial court agreed. The jury awarded Plaintiff $12,000. The Court of Appeals affirmed that judgment.
- 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.