Property Law Keyed to Singer
Wolinsky v. Kadison
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:
Debra Wae Wolinsky (Plaintiff) is an unmarried woman with children. She owned a unit in a condominium and contracted to purchase another unit in the building. The board of directors of the condominium; (Defendants) notified her that it was exercising its right of first refusal with regards to the unit, and so the contract for sale was terminated. The association’s bylaws state that when exercising the right of first refusal, the board must first obtain a two-thirds affirmative vote of the ownership of the common elements. Chicago’s condominium ordinance states that “no person shall be denied the right to purchase or lease a unit because of race, religion, sex, sexual preference, marital status or national origin.” Municipal Code of Chicago 1978, ch. 100.2, par. 100.2-4. Plaintiff alleges that the board exercised an unreasonable restraint on alienation, which was in violation of the bylaws and a breach of fiduciary duty and violated the anti-discrimination section of the Chicag o condominium ordinance.
- 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.