Confirm favorite deletion?
Securities Regulation Keyed to Coffee
In re Worlds of Wonder Securities Litigation
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:
In 1986, after posting two of the most successful toys of the Christmas season WOW wanted to expand so in June of 1987, they organized a public offering of 9% unsecured “junk bonds”, procuring $80 million. WOW filed for bankruptcy after a 1987 Christmas season comprised of price drops and layoffs which made the bonds worthless. A class of investors (Plaintiff) brought suit against WOW’s directors, officers, underwriters, auditors and main shareholders. The district court granted summary judgment to WOW on all allegations, reporting: (1) with the potential exclusion of the 1987 financial statements, its debenture prospectus included no inaccurate statements or omissions and (2) each defendant had an favorable defense to § 11 liability as a matter of law even if the 1987 statements were inaccurate. The class 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.