Conflicts Keyed to Currie
Siegelman v. Cunard White Star Ltd.
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:
Mrs. Siegelman (Plaintiff) and her husband purchased an Atlantic crossing ticket from Cunard Lines (Defendant) in New York. The ticket, which was in the form of a contract, contained three clauses relevant to this case. One was that any action for death or injury to a passenger must be filed within one year from the date of the accident. The second stated that all questions arising on the contract would be decided according to English law. The third clause stated that any alterations of the contract terms of Cunard (Defendant) liability must be in writing. Mrs. Siegelman (Plaintiff) was injured while on the high seas and filed a claim for reimbursement. The one-year deadline approached before settlement of the claim and a claims agent from Cunard (Defendant) stated, when asked, that suit would not have to be filed since there was an excellent chance of settlement. Mrs. Siegelman (Plaintiff) subsequently died and Defendant then denied any recovery on the basis that Plaintiff’s claim did not survive her. Mr. Siegelman (Plaintiff) then filed suit past the one-year time limit, asserting waiver of the limit by the claims agent. Citing the terms of the contract, the district court dismissed the suit on motion by Defendant.
- 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.