Property Keyed to Rabin
Ward v. Slavecek
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:
Ward (Plaintiff) andSlavecek (Defendant) are owners of adjacent lots that used to be one lot. In 1919, before the lot was divided, the common owner built a driveway extending to the garage at the western border of the lot. Along the east border was a public road, and along the west border was an alley. Plaintiff and Slavecek purchased their lots in 1925 and 1928, respectively. Slavecek then built a garage and used the driveway in common with Plaintiff and with Plaintiff’s consent. Then in 1970, Slavecek installed a metal fence which, according to Plaintiff, prevented him from using the driveway and made the garage useless. The fence bisected the property along the driveway. As a result, Plaintiff filed suit to establish an implied easement. The trial court found that Plaintiff could access the garage via the alley and that there was still sufficient space between the gate and Plaintiff’s house to allow vehicular access to his garage from the public road. The court refused to find an easement by implication. 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.