Confirm favorite deletion?
Commercial Law Keyed to Lopucki
Stowell v. Cloquet Co-op Credit Union
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:
Respondent opened a savings and draft account with Petitioner and signed a Draft Withdrawal Agreement. The agreement provided in part that Respondent had 20 days from mailing to object to items on the Draft Account statement before the accuracy of the items were considered final. Respondent read and understood this agreement. Between December of 1992 and September of 1993, Robert Nelson stole and forged several checks belonging to Respondent as well as the Petitioner’s issued statements. Respondent complained repeatedly to Petitioner that he had not received the statements but failed to take any other action. In September of 1993 Respondent received a telephone call from the Finlayson State Bank informing him that a check he had written to Robert Nelson had bounced. Because he had never written any checks to Robert Nelson, Respondent became suspicious and notified police and Petitioner. Upon reviewing the account statements both parties realized that Robert Nelson had forged fifty checks in the amount of approximately $22,000 from Respondent’s account. When Petitioner refused to reimburse him, Respondent brought this suit.
- 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.