Health Law Keyed to Furrow
Conn v. United States
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:
John Conn (Plaintiff) suffered from chest pains and visited the Veterans Administration hospital ("United States" or "VA") (Defendant). He received testing and was there overnight. Following Plaintiff's release, he went back to the hospital after suffering a massive heart attack. Conn and his wife (Plaintiffs) filed suit against the VA (Defendant) for medical malpractice. Dr. Mark Strong was retained as a defense expert in the Plaintiffs' lawsuit. Dr. Strong indicated that the Defendant's doctors did not diagnose Plaintiff's condition appropriately and, in particular, did not treat Plaintiff according to the practice guidelines of the American College of Cardiology Foundation, American Heart Association. Defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted by the trial court based on Dr. Strong's failure to state the standard of care, that Defendant breached that standard, and that Plaintiff's injury was caused by any breach. Plaintiffs then 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.