Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Abbott v. Bob’s U-Drive
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 April 1952, Abbott (Plaintiff) leased property to Robert E. Thompson to operate an automobile U-Drive business and an automobile leasing business. Any disputes arising out of the lease were to be settled in arbitration. Thompson subsequently incorporated Bob’s U-Drive (Defendant) and Continental Leasing Company (Defendant). Thompson served as the president and manager of both corporations and owned half the stock of each. Although the two corporations were distinct entities, they operated out of the same office. The two corporations enjoyed an equal status as tenants of the leased premises. In August 1954, Thompson assigned his interest in the lease to Bob’s U-Drive in a written instrument. No such assignment was made to Continental Leasing Company. A few years later, a dispute relating to the rent arose and Plaintiff proceeded to initiate arbitration proceedings. Bob’s U-Drive conceded that it was subject to the arbitration clause of the lease. Continental, however, sought dismissal of Plaintiff’s petition to arbitrate. Continental argued that it was not bound by the arbitration clause because the lease had not been assigned to Continental. The circuit court nevertheless ordered Continental to arbitrate. At hearing, the arbitrators awarded Plaintiff $2,938.88. Continental 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.