Property Law Keyed to Cribbet
Urbaitis v. Commonwealth Edison
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:
Plaintiffs, a group of landowners whose property is directly abutting the land in question, and the Commonwealth Edison (Defendant), claim title to a strip of land formerly used as a railway under the same conveyance from Dodson to the Chicago, Wheaton and Western Railway in 1909. The strip of land is approximately 100 feet wide and 2,713 feet long. The Plaintiffs own residences next to the strip of land and allege that they have improved the land with gardens and lawn ornaments. Plaintiffs brought this action to quiet title to the strip of land based on the contention that Dodson conveyed the strip of land to the railway company only as an easement for purposes of building a railway and that the easement was abandoned in 1946 when the strip of land ceased being used for such purposes. In the alternative, Plaintiffs allege that when the strip of land ceased being used for railway purposes, the land reverted to Dodson’s heirs, who then deeded their interest to Plaintiffs. The D efendant contends that Dodson conveyed an estate in fee simple to the railway company in 1909. Therefore, Defendant has the title in fee simple and has the power to grant a perpetual easement to the Forest Preserve District.
- 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.