Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to French
Paxson v. Glovitz
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 1979, the owners of two adjoining parcels of land orally agreed to create an easement along with a boundary line between the parcels. The easement, which was twenty feet wide, was intended to last for all time, and was used to construct a paved roadway. Although the easement was never recorded in any written document, the public used the roadway, and subsequent owners of the property believed that the public had a right to access the road. In 1995, Paxson (Plaintiff) acquired one parcel, and in 1998, Glovitz (Defendant) acquired the other. At the time of the purchases, both parties were told that the public had a right to use the road. In 2000, Defendant began to construct a fence along his property line over the driveway, and Plaintiff sued to obtain an easement by prescription for the portion of the driveway that lay on Defendant’s land. Defendant moved for summary judgment, claiming that Plaintiff’s claim had no basis in law or fact, and alternatively that Plaintiff had expanded the scope of the easement. The trial court granted Defendant’ motion for summary judgment, and awarded him attorney’s fees, finding that Plaintiff’s suit had no basis in law or in fact. Plaintiff 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.