Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Dawson
Macke Co. v. Pizza of Gaithersburg, Inc.
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 Appellees-Defendants, are Pizza of Gaithersburg, Inc. and three other corporations under the common ownership of Thomas S. Sherwood and Eugene Early (the "Defendants"). The Defendants contracted with Virgina Coffee Service, Inc. ("Virginia") on December 30, 1966 and July 25, 1967 to provide six pizza shops with cold drink vending machines. On December 30, 1967, the Plaintiff, Macke Co. (the "Plaintiff"), purchased the assets of Virginia. The contracts with the Defendants' six pizza shops, were assigned to the Plaintiff by Virginia. In January 1968, the Defendant attempted to terminate all 6 contracts. The Plaintiff brought suit against the Defendants alleging breach of contract. The lower court found that Virginia's duties were non-delegable to the Plaintiff because the Defendant "relied on [Virginia's] skill, judgment and reputation".
- 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.