Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Scott
Sedmak v. Charlie’s Chevrolet, 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:
Dr. and Mrs. Sedmak (Plaintiffs) discovered that Chevrolet intended to manufacture a small number of a limited edition Corvette, the Pace car. Dr. Sedmak contacted Charlie’s Chevrolet, Inc. (Defendant) to inquire about the car and Kells, Defendant’s sales manager, told him that a deposit would be required. Mrs. Sedmak hand-delivered the deposit to Defendant and received a receipt. While there, Mrs. Sedmak ordered upgrades to the standard equipment. According to Kells, he did order the upgrades, but ordered them because they would be better for the car, rather than because Plaintiffs wanted them. Mrs. Sedmak said that Kells told her that the car would cost about $15,000, but Kells denied discussing price. Kells notified Plaintiffs when the car arrived at Defendant, but informed them that they could not buy it for the price quoted because there had been so much demand for it that the price had inflated. He also notified them that they could bid on the car, but they did not submit a bid. Plaintiffs sued for specific performance in the trial court. The trial court granted specific performance. Defendant appealed to the Missouri Court of Appeals.
- 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.