Torts Keyed to Epstein
Jewell v. CSX Transportation, 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:
Plaintiffs were traveling in their pickup truck in a rural area. As the pickup truck approached the railroad crossing, the road narrowed and went up an incline to cross the elevated tracks. There were no lights, bells, or mechanical gates guarding the railroad crossing. The only warning devices were standard cross bucks. As the Plaintiffs crossed the tracks, the train struck and all three were thrown from the pickup truck. Husband died and wife and daughter sustained injuries. Plaintiffs alleged that CSX Transportation, Inc. (Defendant), was negligent in failing to sound a warning as the train approached the crossing, the train crew failed to exercise ordinary care in the operation of the train, and that the railroad crossing was extra-hazardous. The district court issued a directed verdict that the railroad crossing was not extra-hazardous. The jury returned a verdict for Defendant. Plaintiffs appealed.
- 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.