Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Calamari
Lucas v. Hamm
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 Plaintiffs, Lucas and others (the "Plaintiffs"), are some of the beneficiaries under the will of Eugene H. Emmick ("Mr. Emmick"). The Plaintiff brought suit against the Defendant, L.S. Ham (the "Defendant"), who was engaged by Mr. Emmick to prepare his will and certain codocils. Under the will prepared by the Defendant, the Plaintiff was to receive 15% of the residue of a trust to be established. The Defendant in attempting to establish the trust was negligent, and used phrases that violated the "Civil Code relating to restraints on alienation and the rule against perpetuities." The will and codicils were admitted to probate and shortly thereafter the Defendant wrote to the Plaintiffs and informed them that their distributions were invalid. Instead of receiving the 15% residue of the trust, the Plaintiffs would have to enter into a settlement with Mr. Emmick's blood relatives and receive $75,000 less than they would have if the Defendant properly drafted the provision of the will. The Plaintiffs brought suit against the Defendant as third party beneficiaries of the contract made between the Defendant and Mr. Emmick to prepare the Mr. Emmick's will. The Defendant demurred and the lower court sustained the demurrer.
- 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.