Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Merrill
Wood v. Leadbitter
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:
Wood (“Plaintiff”)bought a ticket to attend horse races that were schedule to take place on property owned by Lord Eglintoun (“Eglintoun”). With the ticket,Plaintiff would be permitted to enter Eglintoun’s property and stay there while the races took place. For reasons that are unknown, Eglintoun decided to remove Plaintiff from the property while one of the races were taking place. Lead bitter (“Defendant”), Eglintoun’s servant, forcibly removed Plaintiff from the property. Plaintiff brought suit against Defendant alleging assault and false imprisonment. Thereafter, the trial court instructed the jury that Eglintoun was authorized to remove Plaintiff from his property, regardless of Eglintoun’s reason. Also, the trial court instructed the jury that Eglintoun did not have a duty to reimburse Plaintiff with the money Plaintiff paid for the ticket.Plaintiff alleged that his ticket granted him an irrevocable license to remain on Eglintoun’s property while the races took place. The jury held for Defendant.
- 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.