Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Epstein
Camden County Board of Chosen Freeholders v. Beretta, U.S.A. Corp
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’s conduct and the marketing and distribution of handguns, created and contributed to the widespread criminal use of handguns in the county. Plaintiff invoked three theories of liability: negligence, negligent entrustment, and public nuisance. The district court rejected all three of Plaintiff’s theories. On appeal, Plaintiff dismissed the two negligence claims and pursued only the public nuisance claim. Plaintiff contended that Defendant knowingly facilitated, participated in, and maintained a handgun distribution system that provided criminals and youth easy access to handguns, and that Defendant knowingly created the public nuisance of criminals and youth with handguns. Plaintiff contended that Defendant released into the market substantially more handguns than they expect to sell to law-abiding purchasers. And that Defendant continued to use certain distribution channels, despite knowing that those channels lead to increased criminal activit y.
- 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.