Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Tippecanoe Associates II, LLC v. Kimco Lafayette 671, Inc.
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:
SES Development Company (SES) owned the Sagamore Shopping Center in Indiana. Beginning April 27, 1973, SES leased one of its stores to Kroger Company (Kroger), a grocery store operator, for twenty years. The lease contained a covenant restricting SES from renting space in the shopping center or within a two-mile radius to any other grocery store operators. On January 15, 1997, SES sold the shopping center to Kimco Lafayette 671, Inc. (Plaintiff). At the time, Target occupied almost half the space at the shopping center. But in April 2000, Target moved out of the shopping center. Despite various attempts, the only new tenant Plaintiff was able to attract was Schnucks, a grocery store operator. On December 6, 2001, Plaintiff filed suit requesting the trial court to declare the restrictive covenant in the SES-Kroger lease to be unenforceable. By that point, the lease had undergone various assignments until Tippecanoe Associates II, LLC (Defendant) had the rights to the lease and the property was subleased to H.H. Gregg Appliances, Inc. The trial court declared the restrictive covenant unenforceable.
- 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.