Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Epstein
Credit Alliance Corporation v. Arthur Andersen & 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 facts of both cases are as follows: * In Credit Alliance Corp. v. Arthur Anderson & Co., Plaintiffs brought suit against Arthur Anderson & Co. (Defendant) for failure to conduct investigations in accordance with proper auditing standards, when Plaintiffs relied on Defendant’s financial reports in lending money to another party. The lower courts denied Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and certified a question to the court of appeals, regarding whether their order was correct. * In European Am. Bank & Trust Co. v. Strahs & Kaye, the bank brought suit against Defendant for exaggeration of another company’s assets, which Plaintiff relied on in lending money to an insolvent company. In that case, the appellate division reversed a dismissal of Plaintiff’s complaint on the grounds that Defendant knew or should have known that Plaintiff was relying on their statements. A similar question was certified to the court of appeals for decision.
- 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.