Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Yeazell
International Shoe Co. v. Washington
ProfessorBrittany L. Raposa
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:
Appellant, International Shoe, was a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Missouri. It was engaged in the manufacture and sale of shoes and other footwear. Appellant had no office in Washington and made no contracts for sale of purchase of merchandise there. It maintained no stock of merchandise in that state and made no deliveries of goods there. During the years 1937 to 1940, Appellant employed 11 to 13 salespeople who resided in Washington, and whose principal activities occurred in Washington. The authority of the salesmen was limited to exhibiting their samples and soliciting orders from prospective buyers. The salesmen sent the orders to Appellant’s headquarters in Missouri, and merchandise was shipped from points outside Washington to the purchasers within the state. Pursuant to the Washington Unemployment Compensation Act, the state of Washington attempted to obtain funds from Appellant. The notice of assessment was personally served in the state of Washington upon a sales agent of the Appellant Corporation. Appellant made a special appearance to oppose jurisdiction, which was denied by the Appeal Tribunal. After the Washington Supreme Court upheld the order making Appellant subject to suits in its state courts, this appeal followed.
- 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.