Constitutional Law Keyed to Stone
Shelley v. Kraemer
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:
The Petitioners had purchased a home burdened by restrictive covenants that excluded non-whites from purchasing real property in the neighborhood. The Respondents, Kraemer and others (Respondents), had brought an action in state court seeking to enforce the covenant provisions. The state court upheld the provisions and ruled the Respondents were entitled to an injunction prohibiting the Petitioners from occupying the property. The Supreme Court of the United States (Supreme Court), in analyzing the case, stated that the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution, applied only to state action and not to the conduct of private individuals. Next, the Supreme Court stated that the restrictive covenants prohibiting non-whites from purchasing property in the neighborhood was a private action and thus did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. The Supreme Court then reasoned that the enforcement of the restrictive covenants by a state c ourt triggered state action, thus, permitting the Petitioners to argue their Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated.
- 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.