Contracts Keyed to Summers
Mauldin v. Sheffer
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:
L. Miles Sheffer (Plaintiff), a licensed architect, was hired to provide architectural services for the design and construction of five school buildings. Plaintiff entered an agreement with John G. Mauldin (Defendant), a registered professional mechanical engineer, under which Defendant was to provide engineering plans and specifications for the five school buildings. The plans and specifications provided by Defendant were rejected because they violated the laws of physics and the rules and regulations governing the project. As a result, Plaintiff had to employ another engineer to supply new plans and specifications, and lost the opportunity to work on other school projects he had previously secured. Plaintiff sued Defendant, alleging that Defendant had used plans and specifications from his previous projects that were unsuitable for Plaintiff’s project. Plaintiff claimed negligence and aggravated tortious conduct, and sought $500,000 in punitive and exemplary damages. Defendant filed a general demurrer to the petition. The trial court overruled the demurrer. Defendant 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.