Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Reldresal v. Bolgolam
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:
Reldresal (Plaintiff) owns property in the town of Belfaborac. On March 15, 1997, Plaintiff entered a ten-year lease with Bolgolam (Defendant). The terms of the lease did not indicate the purpose for which Defendant would use the property, but Defendant intended to open a bar and restaurant in the building. Plaintiff was not only aware of his intent, but also assisted Defendant in renovating the building for use as a bar and restaurant. Plaintiff’s property, however, was located in an area of Belfaborac in which commercial use of property was prohibited by Belfaborac ordinance. The ordinance provided for variances, by which an owner could escape the ordinance upon showing a special hardship if it were strictly enforced. Defendant did not apply for a variance. But officials were lax about enforcing the ordinance, and Defendant proceeded to open the bar and restaurant without problems. Once in business, the bar produced most of Defendant’s large profit margin, although it only took up a small portion of the property. In November 1998, the county voted to enact a new ordinance prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages over four percent alcohol. This ordinance was strictly enforced, and, as a result, Defendant was unable to sell spirits and wines, causing his profits to decrease sharply. Once patrons could no longer order these drinks with their meals, restaurant sales dropped as well. Defendant was eventually forced to downsize his staff and let his chef go. The resulting decline in quality of service and food eventually forced Defendant to close the restaurant and bar. When he failed to pay rent, Plaintiff sued to recover rental payments in March 1999. Defendant argued that the lease was not valid when executed and that, in the alternative, supervening events made the lease illegal and unenforceable. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff.
- 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.