Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Law Keyed to Cribbet
Noone v. Price
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:
Mr. and Mrs. Noone (Plaintiffs) bought a house on the side of a mountain. Union Carbide built the house in 1928 or 1929. The Plaintiffs bought the house in 1960. In 1964, Plaintiffs became aware that the wall under their front porch was giving way and that the living room plaster had cracked. Price (Defendant) lived below the Plaintiffs at the foot of the hill in a house built in 1912. Between 1912 and 1919, a wall of stone and concrete was built along the side of the hill, ten to twelve feet behind Defendant’s house. The Defendant purchased her house in 1955 and lived there until 1972, when Defendant sold the property. Before Defendant’s purchase of the house, the wall had fallen into disrepair. The Plaintiffs, upon discovering that their house was slipping down the hill, complained to Defendant that their problem was the result of deterioration in the Defendant’s retaining wall. Defendant did nothing to repair the wall and Plaintiffs expended $6,000 to repair the damage to t heir house. The Plaintiffs commenced this action in 1968 for damages of $50,000 for failure of Defendant to provide lateral support to Plaintiffs’ land and negligent failure to provide lateral support to Plaintiffs’ home. Defendant made a motion for summary judgment, which the lower court denied in part and granted in part. The lower court found that Plaintiffs had no right to recover for damage to their buildings, but left open the question of whether Plaintiffs could recover for damage to their land. The lower court stated that there is a duty of lateral support to the land but not for any structures on the land. The 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.