Ethics Keyed to Hazard
Murphy & Demory, Ltd. v. Murphy
Defendants, Admiral Daniel J. Murphy and his firm Murphy and Associates are alleged to have broken an employment contract and breached fiduciary duties to Plaintiff, Murphy’s former firm Murphy & Demory, Ltd. Plaintiff’s law firm, Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro and two of its lawyers in its D.C. office are also named as defendants for alleged malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty in their representation of Defendant Murphy after he left Plaintiff’s firm. Junior associates in the firm had repeatedly attempted to warn the firm that this dual representation was a serious conflict of interests, but all such warnings were directed to the case’s lead attorney, Deanne Siemer, who ignored them.
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.
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.