Confirm favorite deletion?
Securities Regulation Keyed to Coffee
Stephenson v. Paine Webber Jackson & Curtis, 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:
A tax attorney, Stephenson, had a trading account with Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc (Paine), and utilized the account to trade in options. Stephenson was informed that owed $4000 for an unauthorized trade made in his name by a Paine broker, Welch. He challenged Welch without challenging Paine then proceeded to ignore monthly statements and failed to ensure mistakes in his account were rectified. Almost a year later, Stephenson finally wrote a letter to Paine referencing 59 purportedlyillegal transactions in his account. Although such transactions were accounted for in monthly statements and confirmation slips, Stephenson had ignored them. Stephenson filed suit under, inter alia, Rule 10b-5. The district court dismissed, stating that Stephenson did not carry his onus of proving Rule 10b-5 violations and also found that his allegations were banned by the equitable defense for laches, waiver and ratification. The court of appeals granted review.
- 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.