Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Maier v. Giske
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:
Elizabeth and James Maier (Plaintiffs) owned property to the east of a parcel of land owned by Nancy Giske (Defendant). To the south of Defendant’s land was a parcel of property owned by Defendant’s son, Max Batres. Defendant was caretaker of her son’s land as Batres did not live on the property. Plaintiffs’ deed of conveyance included a non-exclusive easement over a strip of land approximately fifteen feet in width that extended onto Batres’ property. A gravel driveway linking the three parcels was located along the easement. Defendant constructed a fence and planted shrubs along the easement. Plaintiffs objected and claimed the fence was located on their easement and blocked their ability to construct a vehicle turnaround. PlaintiffssuedDefendant alleging claims of trespass, nuisance, and interference with their easement rights. Defendant counter-claimed and sought an order to quiet title to a portion of the easement. Prior to trial, Defendant moved for summary judgment dismissal of Plaintiffs’ claims. Defendant argued that the easement was void for failure to comply with the statute of frauds because it did not sufficiently describe the servient estate. The trial court dismissed Plaintiffs’ claims. Plaintiffs 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.