Contracts Keyed to Farnsworth
Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Ingram
Ingram (D) worked at Central Adjustment Bureau (P), a corporation. D was working for P for one week when P indicated that D must sign a non-compete clause. Initially D objected, but when threatened with termination, he signed. D left P to form Ingram & Associates. Ingram & Associates competed directly with P. P brought suit against D seeking compensatory and injunctive relief for breach of the non-compete covenant. The Chancellor awarded P $80,000 and injunctive relief. The Court of Appeals reversed the Chancellor, holding that the covenants were unenforceable for lack of consideration. P appealed.
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.