Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Trickett v. Ochs
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:
Defendants were in the business of growing and selling apples from their apple orchard. The orchard included a residence used as a homestead and a farmhouse used to store the apples. In 1992, Defendants sold the residence to Plaintiffs. The residence was located immediately across the road from the barn. At the time of purchase, Defendants’ use of the barn did not bother Plaintiffs because Defendants immediately shipped the apples out of the barn. However, in the mid-1990s, Defendants began waxing and storing the apples on-site in refrigerated tractor-trailer trucks. In the winter, tractor-trailer trucks arrived at the barn before dawn and throughout the day to pick up the apples. This new activity resulted in increased noise and light glare at the plaintiff’s residence. In August 1997, Plaintiffs complained to the zoning administrator, but these complaints were dismissed. In November 2000, Plaintiffs filed a nuisance suit against Defendants seeking an injunction and damages. The superior court found that the jurisdiction’s right-to-farm law barred Plaintiffs’ suit.
- 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.