Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Epstein
Ellsworth v. Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, Inc
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 alleged that Defendant misstated Plaintiff’s professional and financial rating in its directory. The directory is widely read by lawyers who forward legal business. Plaintiff claimed that this was defamatory and his reputation was injured. Plaintiff entered into evidence, Defendant’s listings for the years 1928 and 1929. In 1928 Defendant downgraded Plaintiff. In 1929, Defendant left his rating blank. Plaintiff also introduced evidence that his earnings were substantially lower in 1928. When the case was first before the court, it was held that the alleged defamation was not actionable per se and that Plaintiff would have to prove special damages. Plaintiff amended his complaint and alleged that his earnings were substantially lower and that he was damaged by more than $2,500.00. This was an appeal from an order overruling a demurrer to the amended complaint.
- 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.