Torts Keyed to Dobbs
Harris v. Board of Education of Howard County
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 Ms. Harris was fifty-eight years old and had been employed by the defendant for 12 years as a food service assistant. Her duties included preparing lunches for the students, tending the cash register, cleaning the kitchen and laundering all linens used throughout the day. Her work involved lifting boxes of food weighing 35 pounds. On January 25, 1999, she was doing laundry and had to drag a heavy box of laundry detergent then lift the inner back of powder. After bending to scoop some soap into a cup, she bent down a second tie to tie up the bag of powder. At that point her back “cracked” and she screamed. She was unable to stand upright or sit. Her manager gave her an incident form and early release and she went to a nearby clinic and saw Dr. Jackson. Her injury claim was allowed by Workers’ Compensation but on judicial review the jury found for the employer. The Maryland Supreme Court reversed.
- 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.