Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Interior Trails Preservation Coalition v. Swope
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:
Greg and Donna Swope (Defendants) bought land near the Skyline Ridge Trail in 1997. Defendants put up a barricade and a “no trespassing” sign when they saw numerous people crossing their property. In 2002, residents in the area formed a non-profit corporation, the Interior Trails Preservation Coalition (Plaintiff), to keep recreational trails open to the public. Plaintiff sued Defendants to establish a public prescriptive easement over Defendants’ land, arguing that the public had used the land since the 1950s. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The superior court granted the motion, ruling that (1) Plaintiff did not have standing and (2) Plaintiff had not been in existence long enough to satisfy the ten years of continuous use necessary to establish a prescriptive easement. Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. Plaintiff then petitioned the Supreme Court of Alaska for review, which was granted.
- 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.