Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Summers
Akers v. J.B. Sedberry, Inc.
Citation:39 Tenn. App. 633, 286 S.W.2d 617
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:
Mrs. M.B. Sedberry (co-defendant) was the president and principal stockholder of J.B. Sedberry, Inc. (co-defendant), a corporation that distributed hammer mills. J.B. Sedberry employed Charles Akers and William Whitsitt (plaintiffs) as Chief Engineer and Assistant Chief Engineer, respectively, pursuant to written contracts for five-year terms. J.B. Sedberry later began experiencing financial difficulties. Mrs. Sedberry held a conference with Akers and Whitsitt to discuss the company. At the conference, Akers and Whitsitt offered their resignations on a ninety-day notice provided that they were paid according to the contract for that period. Mrs. Sedberry, however, refused to accept their resignations and brushed the matter aside. A few days later, Mrs. Sedberry sent via telegram notice that Akers and Whitsitt’s resignations were accepted, effective immediately. Akers and Whitsitt each individually sued Mrs. Sedberry and J.B. Sedberry for breach of their employment contracts.
- 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.