Confirm favorite deletion?
International Law Keyed to Damrosche
Wilson v. Girad
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:
A Japanese woman was wounded during a military exercise in Japan by Girad (D), who was a Specialist Third Class in the United States Army. A security treaty between Japan and the United States authorized the making of administrative agreements between the two governments concerning the conditions that would govern the disposition of the United States Armed Forces in Japan. The agreement stipulated that the United States was at liberty to waive its jurisdiction over offenses committed in Japan by members of its armed forces. The two countries subsequently entered into another protocol agreement in pursuant to the NATO agreement. It authorized that in criminal cases where the right to jurisdiction is concurrent, the military authorities of the United States would have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over members of the armed forces for offenses arising out of any act or omission done in the performance of official duty. Since Girad (D) act was done in the performance of official duty which gave the U.S. jurisdiction, the United States (P) claimed it had the right to try Girad (D). Japan countered this on the ground that Girad’s (D) action was not within the scope of his official duty and therefore it had the primary right of jurisdiction. The U.S. ultimately waived whatever jurisdiction it might have. A writ of habeas corpus sought by Girad (D) was denied but he was granted an injunction against delivery to the Japanese authorities. Wilson (P), Secretary of Defense, 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.