Contracts Keyed to Murray
Farley v. Champs Fine Foods, Inc.
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:
Dennis Farley (Plaintiff) negotiated with Champs Fine Foods, Inc. (Defendant) for the purchase of common stock from its parent corporation, Champs Food Systems, Ltd. Plaintiff submitted multiple offers to buy, which were rejected by Oscar Grubert, Defendant’s president and chairman of the board. Grubert then sent a letter to Plaintiff offering to sell under certain terms and imposing a deadline for acceptance. Before that deadline, Plaintiff telephoned Grubert. During the phone call, Grubert told Plaintiff he was not going to enter into an agreement with him. That same day, Plaintiff sent Grubert a letter stating that he was prepared to accept the offer to sell outlined in Grubert’s letter. When Grubert refused to sell, Plaintiff sued Defendant for specific performance. The trial court dismissed the action, finding that: (1) Plaintiff mailed his acceptance letter after his phone conversation with Grubert and (2) the offer to sell was therefore withdrawn before it was accepted. Plaintiff 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.