Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Knapp
Plowman v. Indian Refining Co
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:
Defendant told Plaintiffs that they would receive half of their current wages every payday for the rest of their life. The consideration for this agreement was a desire to provide for the welfare of these older employees who had worked for Defendant for many years. Plaintiffs remained on Defendant’s payroll and insurance payments continued to be deducted from the checks. However, Plaintiffs were not required to perform any services other than coming to pick up their checks at the office every payday. The payments were made for almost a year before Defendant informed Plaintiffs that they were terminating the arrangement. Defendant disputes Plaintiffs’ contention that the payments were to be made for life. Instead, Defendant claims that the payments were made to protect the employees from cut backs or layoffs occurring at the plant and that there was no specified duration for receiving the remittance. According to Defendant, the arrangement was gratuitous and was not approved by the board of directors.
- 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.