Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Epstein
Alaska Packers’ Ass’n v. Domenico
Citation:117 F. 99 (1902)
ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
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:
The employer, Alaska Packers (appellant), owned a salmon packing factory in Alaska. The employees (appellee) were California sailors and fishermen who contracted to work for appellant in Alaska during the salmon season for $50 per sailor or fishermen. The libelants arrived in Alaska in April; in late May, the libelants stopped working and demanded an increase in salary. It was impossible for the appellant to find any replacement workers in Alaska or bring replacement workers from California in time to take full advantage of the short salmon season. The appellant agreed to increase the libelants’ fixed salary from $50 to $100. The libelants returned to work. After the libelants returned to California, appellant refused to pay more than $50 originally promised. Libelants sued to enforce the agreement modifying the employment contract.
- 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.