Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to French
Van Sandt v. Royster
Citation:83 P.2d 698 (Kan. 1938)
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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:
In 1904, Laura Bailey owned a plot of land that included lots 19, 20, and 4. In late Mrs. Bailey constructed a private lateral drain across her property on lot 4 running west across lots 20 and 19 connecting to the public sewer. January 15, 1904 Mrs. Bailey conveyed lot 19 to another individual with a general warranty deed. That individual built a residence on the lot, and then conveyed it to another who, in 1924, conveyed it to the plaintiff, Van Sandt. In 1904, Mrs. Bailey conveyed lot 20 to a man, who, eventually conveyed it to one of the defendants, Royster. Defendant Gray eventually succeeded to title of Lot 4 where Mrs. Bailey’s property was. In March, 1936, Van Sandt discovered his basement was flooded with sewage, and, upon investigation, found for the first time that there existed on and across his property a lateral sewer drain extending from his property across the property of the Royster and Gray. Both Royster and Gray refused to cease draining and discharging their sewage across Van Sandt’s lot. This lawsuit ensued.
- 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.