Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Dobbs
Wait v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Illinois
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 Kristina Wait worked as an executive with the American Cancer Society (ACS). Due to lack of office space, she was allowed to work from home. ACS furnished office equipment and a budget to purchase office supplies. She did all her daily work from her home office and she held meetings with her supervisor and co-workers there. One day as she was preparing her lunch she opened her door to a neighbor, Nathaniel Sawyers, who brutally beat her for no apparent reason. Plaintiff sought workers’ compensation benefits from Travelers Indemnity, the insurer of ACS. The chancery court granted summary judgment for defendant on the grounds that the injuries did not arise out of or occur in the course of employment. The Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed, finding that although the injuries were suffered in the course of employment, they did not arise out of her employment.
- 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.