Contracts Keyed to Kuney
In re: Dow Corning Corp., Bear Stearns Government Securities v. Dow Corning Corp.
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:
Twenty-seven offended parties sued Dow Corning Corporation (Dow) (defendant), looking for recuperation for injuries coming about because of faulty breast implants manufactured by Dow. The parties gone into a settlement agreement, under which Dow consented to pay the offended parties an aggregate of $17,000,000 over several years in a series of installments. Dow likewise consented to pay $100 for every day that Dow was late in paying a specific offended party. This arrangement was at first proposed as a penalty provision, however, was portrayed in the final agreement as liquidated damages. Dow later petitioned for insolvency and quit making settlement installments. The offended parties sold their rights to the settlement installments to Bear Stearns Investment Products, Inc. and, related entities (Bear Stearns) (offended party). A long time later, the bankruptcy court affirmed a reorganization plan for Dow that included installment to Bear Stearns of the rest of the settlement measure of $13,000,000, in addition to interest of $9,600,000, however, did not consider the $8,750,000 that was asked for as liquidated damages. Bear Stearns appealed the denial of its liquidated damages to the district court. The district court entered summary judgment in favor of Dow, finding that the damages clause was an unenforceable penalty provision. Bear Stearns appealed.
- 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.