Torts Keyed to Dobbs
Kerans v. Porter Paint Co
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:
The Appellants were Mr. and Mrs. Kerans (Appellants). Mrs. Kerans worked for a retail outlet owned by the Appellee and alleged the store manager sexually harassed her. Mrs. Kerans reported the incidents and the manager subsequently resigned. The Appellants filed a claim against the Appellee. The Appellants settled the claim against the Appellees’ store manager, but expressly reserved their right to bring action against the company, which they did filing a complaint containing five counts. The trial court granted summary judgment. The court of appeals affirmed. The Ohio Supreme Court reversed the judgment as to all the causes of action, except the first because it essentially duplicated of the other claims. The court held that the employee’s claims for sexual harassment were not barred by the exclusivity provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act (the Act) and further that there were disputed issues of fact as to whether the supervisor was acting in the scope of his employment and as to whether the employer knew or should have known about the supervisor’s alleged history of sexual harassment.
- 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.