Contracts Keyed to Calamari
Estate of Lovekamp
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 Appellant, Louise Serrato (the "Appellant") and the decedent were married, but at the time of decedent's death had been divorced for eighteen years. The Appellant initially alleged that when her and the decedent were divorced, they entered into an oral agreement in which the decedent agreed to give the Appellant $60,000. However, the Appellant eventually said the agreement was not made upon the parties' divorce in 1975, but in July, 1981. The Appellant alleged the agreement was "to prevent the forced sale and partition of the ranch and cattle jointly held by the parties." However, in July of 1981, the parties did not owe any property jointly. Instead, several months after the parties divorce, they began living with one another again, and the decedent wrote a check to the Appellant for $60,000 dated July 29, 1981. The decedent said the check was for "coming back and staying with him after they divorced." The decedent died in September, 1999 and the check was too old to cash so the Appellant initiated this action.
- 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.