Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Dobbs
Hartwig v. Oregon Trail Eye Clinic
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:
Plaintiff, a maintenance worker, was disposing non-medical trash at Defendant’s clinic when she was stuck twice by needles penetrating a trash bag. She was given medical attention, and counseled by a nurse with regard to the danger of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or hepatitis infection. The nurse told her that she would require testing for HIV over a year’s period and should conduct herself as if she were infected. She was tested, and after three months medical professionals concluded that there was a 95% chance she was not infected. Prior to trial, Appellee offered a Motion in Limine to exclude testimony concerning Plaintiff’s mental anguish and, while sustaining Appellant’s Motion for a Directed Verdict instructed the jury that it may not award any damages for anxiety, mental suffering or emotional distress. The jury returned minimal damages, the trial denied Plaintiff’s Motion for a New Trial, and she 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.