Torts Keyed to Goldberg
Interinsurance Exch. of the Automobile Club v. Flores
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.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- 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:
While in his car and stopped at an intersection, Eric Michael Sanders was punched in the face by a pedestrian. Sanders later told his friend Roger Perez of the incident. Perez suggested vengeance. Perez got into Sanders’s van with a gun, and Sanders drove to the scene of the incident. While driving by the intersection scene, Perez shot David Flores, who was standing on the corner. After, Sanders confessed to having knowledge that someone was likely to be shot by Perez. Thereafter, Sanders pleaded nolo contendere to aiding and abetting an assault with a deadly weapon. Rosemary Flores, Defendant, on behalf of herself and as guardian ad litem for David, brought suit against Sanders and others for conspiracy, negligence, and battery. Each contention was substantiated by the allegation that Sanders and Perez “agreed to hunt down, shoot, and either kill or maim” the person who punched Sanders. Also, the Inter insurance Exchange of the Automobile Club (“IEAC”) filed an action for declaratory relief to determine whether it bore any responsibility for defending or indemnifying Sanders in Flores’s suit. Sanders’s van was insured by the IEAC. Under the policy, IEAC was responsible for damages for bodily injury “caused by an occurrence arising out of the … use” of the insured vehicle. The declaratory suit went to trial on stipulated facts, which contained a stipulation that Perez had intentionally shot Flores from Sanders’s van. The trial court ruled that the IEAC was not responsible to Sanders. Flores 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.