Contracts Keyed to Jimenez
Ortelere v. Teachers’ Retirement Board of New York
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:
Mrs. Ortelere was employed as a teacher for a time and participated in the Teachers' Retirement System of the City of New York (the System), directed by the Teachers' Retirement Board of New York (the Board) (defendant). At a certain point, she had chosen a retirement payout that would give a little amount of month to month wage and a save that would be paid to her husband, Mr. Ortelere (plaintiff) upon her passing. Whenever Mrs. Ortelere was 60, she endured a "nervous breakdown" and took a leave of absence. She started treatment with a therapist utilized by the Board of Education. The specialist determined her to have “involutional psychosis, melancholia type” and prescribed sedative and stock treatment. Her psychiatrist never felt she was well enough to return to work. She additionally decayed to the point that her significant other quit his business to take care of her. On February 11, a while after her breakdown, yet just before the lapse of her time away, Mrs. Ortelere executed an application to the Board whereby she chose to change her retirement payout. She changed her payout to give a bigger month to month pay and no savings to be paid out to her husband upon her demise. She additionally borrowed against the record. She had been joyfully married to her significant other for about 38 years. Three days before the February election, Mrs. Ortelere educated the Board she planned to resign and posed inquiries that reflected an understanding of the retirement structure. Two months after the February election, Mrs. Ortelere passed away from a condition unrelated to her mental condition. Her better half and executor of her estate brought suit trying to revoke the February election to have it proclaimed void for the absence of a mental capacity. The trial court held that Mrs. Ortelere was mentally incompetent and, in this way, her February election was invalid and void. The Appellate Division reversed and dismissed Mr. Ortelere's complaint, holding there was inadequate proof of incapacity. Mr. Ortelere appealed to the Court of Appeals of New York.
- 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.