Contracts Keyed to Frier
Herrera v. Union No. 39 School Dist.
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:
Dr. Ebaristo Herrera (plaintiff) was a high-school principal. After he was placed on administrative leave, Herrera sued Union No. 39 School District and the district’s superintendent, Dr. James Van Hoof (the District) (defendants). Herrera claimed, in part, that the District deprived him of due process and violated his employment contract by failing to provide a sufficient hearing before placing him on administrative leave. Herrera sought damages for the harm done to his reputation, argued that he lost specific job opportunities because of the damage to his reputation, and claimed those lost opportunities were foreseeable because of the public profile of his job as a school principal. The superior court granted the District’s motion for summary judgment on Herrera’s breach of contract and due process claims. The jury found in the District’s favor on Herrera’s remaining claims. Herrera appealed the superior court’s grant of summary judgment.
- 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.