Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Yeazell
Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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:
Shore (P) brought a class action on behalf of the shareholders against Parklane (D) on the alleged ground that Parklane (D) had issued a false and misleading proxy statement relating to a merger, which violated sections 14(a), 10(b), and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. He sought a rescinding order concerning the merger to which Parklane (D) was one party. Before this trial, the SEC filed an injunctive suit on the same issue. The court in the SEC case decided that the proxy statement was false and misleading, and recorded its declaratory judgment on the issue. Shore (P) moved for partial summary judgment of the case as far as the falsity of the proxy statement was concerned. His grounds for the suit were that collateral estoppel stopped Parklane from re-contesting that issue in court. The motion was not granted by the district court. The decision was reversed by the court of appeals. The U.S. Supreme Court granted a writ for judicial review.
- 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.