Confirm favorite deletion?
Health Law Keyed to Furrow
Carter v. Hucks-Folliss
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. Anthony Hucks-Folliss performed neck surgery on Tommy Carter (Plaintiff) at Moore Regional Hospital Center (Defendant). Hucks-Folliss was a neurosurgeon who was on Defendant's staff for more than twenty years. He had never been certified by the American Board of Neurological Surgery, and had, in fact, failed the certification examination three times. Credentialing and re-credentialing at Moore (Defendant) was required to comply with Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO) standards, which stated that Board certification was an "excellent benchmark and to be considered when delineating clinical privileges." Hucks-Folliss specifically stated on his re-credentialing applications that he was not Board certified. Plaintiff presented two witnesses who testified that Defendant did not seem to have considered during the re-credentialing process that Hucks-Folliss was not Board certified.
- 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.