Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Twerski
Abdullahi v. Pfizer, 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:
Pfizer, a pharmaceutical company, conducted drug trials for an experimental antibiotic called Trovan in northern Nigeria in 1996 during an outbreak of bacterial meningitis. Pfizer gave one-hundred children at the local hospital Trovan and gave another one-hundred children Ceftriaxone, the established antiobiotic to treat bacterial meningitis, at lower doses to allude to the success of Trovan. Pfizer did not receive consent from the patients or their parents to take the experimental drug, inform the patients or their parents of the experimental nature of the study, or that the effective drug to treat bacterial meningitis was being administered in the same hospital. Eleven of the children who took Trovan and the reduced doses of Ceftriaxone died and several other children were left with permanent impairments. The children and their families (plaintiffs) sued Pfizer (Defendant) under the Alien Tort Statute, claiming that Pfizer’s actions violated international law. The district court dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and the 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.
- 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.