Constitutional Law Keyed to Farber
Christian Legal Society Chapter of the University of California, Hastings College of the Law v. Martinez
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 University of California, Hastings College of the Law (Hastings) had a long-standing policy that, in exchange for receiving the benefits of being a school-recognized Registered Student Organization (RSO), an RSO was required to allow any student to participate, become a member of, or seek a leadership position in the RSO, regardless of status or belief. The Christian Legal Society (CLS) Chapter of Hastings (plaintiff) brought suit in federal court against Hastings, acting chancellor and dean Leo Martinez, and others (collectively Defendants) alleging that the policy impaired its First Amendment rights to free speech, expressive association, and civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The CLS sought injunctive and declaratory relief. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment. The district court granted Hastings’s motion for summary judgment and concluded that the policy was a valid exercise in furtherance of a reasonable educational purpose. The court of appeals affirmed. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to 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.