Contracts Keyed to Epstein
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc. v. Triad Architects, Ltd.
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:
Evans, Mechwart, Hambleton & Tilton, Inc. (Plaintiff) entered into two subcontracts to provide civil engineering services to Triad Architects, Ltd. (Defendant) in connection with two contracts that Defendant had with Centurion Development Group, LLC (Centurion). The contracts between Plaintiff and Defendant contained a two payment provisions. The first stated that Defendant “shall pay [Plaintiff] in proportion to amounts received from [Centurion] which are attributable to [Plaintiff’s] services rendered.” The second stated that Plaintiff “shall be paid for their [sic] services under this Agreement within ten (10) working days after” Defendant receives payment from Centurion. Plaintiff substantially performed all of its duties under the contracts, but Centurion cancelled both projects and did not pay Defendant. As a result, Defendant did not pay Plaintiff and claimed that it was not required to because of Centurion’s nonpayment.
- 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.