Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Calamari
In Re Morton Allan Segall, Attorney
Facts
The Respondent, Morton Allan Segall (the "Respondent"), was charged by the Administrator of the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (the "Commission") with three counts of personal misconduct. First, Carte Blanche alleged that the Respondent incurred and did not pay a substantial credit card bill of $12,837.42. A default judgment was entered in favor of Carte Blanche. The Respondent attempted to vacate the default judgment first on November 22, 1982, but in the meantime, on October 4, 1982, directed his secretary to send a check for $95.60 directly to Carte Blanche, intentionally circumventing their counsel. On the back of the check the Respondent included an attempted limitation that read: "acceptance, negotiation or endorsement of this draft shall constitute a full and final release in settlement of all claims and causes of action for Acct. No. 944-148- 645-4 in the name of Mort A. Segall." The Respondent included a letter, which reiterated and went into more detail than what was said on the back of the check. The first default motion was denied and the Respondent filed another motion to vacate on December 19, 1982, attaching a copy of the negotiated check as evidence of a settlement. The trial court concluded "there had been no accord and satisfaction, and dismissed the action." An appellate court affirmed. The Respondent on May 24, 1984, satisfied the judgment in full. • Second, Amoco alleged that the Respondent incurred and did not pay a substantial credit card bill of $11,238.16. October 4, 1982, the Respondent directed his secretary to send a check for $48.76 directly to Amoco, with the same letter and endorsement restriction as the Carte Blanche matter. The Respondent also knew Amoco was represented by counsel. The Respondent sought to dismiss Amoco's complaint, claiming that the negotiated check was evidence. Also, the Respondent attempted to quash his own deposition, which he failed to appear, despite court orders, twice. The Respondent's motion was dismissed by the trial court and the dismissal affirmed by the appellate court.
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.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.