Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Epstein
Moore v. Regents of the University of California
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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 visited UCLA Medical Center shortly after he learned that he had hairy-cell leukemia. Defendant removed Plaintiff’s spleen to save his life. Even before the operation, Golde and Quan (Defendant), a researcher for the University of California, both knew that Plaintiff’s blood products could have great commercial uses unrelated to his medical research. Plaintiff flew from Seattle to UCLA several times because he was told that it was necessary and required for his well-being. However, these visits were designed to collect more research materials. Defendants then developed and patented a cell line from Plaintiff’s cells and licensed them for commercial development. The commercial rights were substantial and included cash payments and stock options. Plaintiff alleged that Defendants failed to disclose preexisting research and economic interests in the cells before obtaining consent to the medical procedures. Plaintiff also seeks to impose liability upon Defendants for the tort of conversion.
- 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.