Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
United States v. Hadlock
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:
Virginia Ruth Hadlock (Defendant) owned several single-family homes that she rented to various individuals. However, after an investigation conducted by the Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO) it was learned that Defendant had a long-standing practice of refusing to rent to families with children. Defendant repeatedly told prospective renters that she did not want children in her homes. The FHCO filed a motion with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) alleging that Defendant engaged in discrimination against families with children. The U.S. (Plaintiff) filed suit against Defendant for violations of the Fair Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHA), and the Oregon Fair Housing Act. The FHCO intervened as a plaintiff in the action (collectively Plaintiffs). Plaintiffs filed a motion for partial summary judgment in federal district court alleging that there were no issues of fact regarding Defendant’s violation of the FHA, 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a) and (c).
- 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.