Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Calamari
White v. McBride
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 Plaintiff, Frank White (the "Plaintiff"), was a friend of Kasper McGrory ("Mr. McGrory"), and his wife Ruby Leigh Anglin McGrory ("Ms. McGrory") (collectively referred to as the "McGrorys"). The Plaintiff, in the early 1970's, assisted the McGrorys in drafting their wills leaving each of their assets to the surviving spouse. The McGrorys' relationship became sour and in the fall of 1990, Ms. McGrory wrote a holographic will, which failed to mention Mr. McGrory. The will was placed in her safe, which contained other valuables. Ms. McGrory's brother, Roma Anglin ("Mr. Anglin"), with the Plaintiff's assistance, procured a durable power of attorney from Ms. McGrory. Pursuant to his power of attorney, a few days before Ms. McGrory's death, Mr. Anglin inventoried the contents of the safe and placed the contents in a safe deposit box. Copies of the holographic will were sent to Mr. McCrory and Mr. White. Ms. McGrory died on December 22, 1990, and after her death on February 28, 1991, Mr. McGrory retained the Plaintiff "to force the probate of Leigh McGrory's estate in Shelby County, Tennessee to ascertain assets, 1/3 of which belong to the husband, in order to recover same." After Mr. McGrory's death, Mr. Anglin took the holographic will and the contents of the safe deposit box to Texas, where he lived. Mr. McGrory died on July 22, 1992, and as of then, none of Ms. McGrory's assets had been distributed. • Mr. McGrory left a will bequeathing virtually his entire estate to the Catholic Diocese of Memphis. The executor of Mr. McGrory's estate hired an attorney, James Bland ("Mr. Bland"), to represent the estate. Mr. Bland wrote the Plaintiff a letter on October 27, 1992, relieving him of his "representation of [Mr. McGrory's] interest in [Ms. McGrory's] estate". Mr. Bland offered to pay the Plaintiff a reasonable fee for the work that he did. The Plaintiff refused to accept this proposal citing the February 28, 1991 contingency fee agreement. The Plaintiff filed a claim against Mr. McGrory's estate for $108,291.00, representing "one-third of $349,000, the amount of Leigh's estate to which Kasper was entitled by law." The probate court held the fee the Plaintiff sought was excessive and unreasonable pursuant to DR 2-106, but found that the Plaintiff could recover under a theory of quantum meruit. The Plaintiff was awarded $12,500 or 114 hours at $150 per hour.
- 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.