Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Summers
Standard Box Co. v. Mutual Biscuit 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:
On September 1, 1905, Standard Box Co. (Plaintiff) offered an option contract to Mutual Biscuit Co. (Defendant). The option would have allowed Defendant, beginning on July 25, 1906, to purchase boxes from Plaintiff for one year at the 1905 price. On April 18, 1906, a serious earthquake caused a shortage of boxes. On July 25, 1906, Defendant sought to exercise the option. Plaintiff refused to sell its boxes at the 1905 price but was willing to sell to Defendant at market price. Plaintiff was aware that Defendant would go out of business if it could not purchase the boxes. Defendant agreed to purchase the boxes at market price, but later refused to pay for all of them. Plaintiff sued to recover the outstanding balance. Defendant counterclaimed, arguing that Plaintiff was required to sell at the 1905 price, and claiming that Defendant had agreed to purchase the boxes at market price under duress. The jury found that no option contract had been formed because Defendant had failed to accept the option within a reasonable time. The jury found in favor of Plaintiff. 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.
- 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.