Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Associations Keyed to Bainbridge
AmerisourceBergen Corporation v. Lebanon County Employees’ Retirement Fund
Citation:243 A.3d 417 (Del. 2020)
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:
In 2007, the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) suspended AmerisourceBergen’s license at its Orlando, Florida distribution center, concluding that AmerisourceBergen had not maintained effective controls there. AmerisourceBergen settled with the DEA and agreed to implement and maintain its facilities a compliance program. Despite these efforts, since 2012, AmerisourceBergen has been the subject of several governmental reports and state and federal lawsuits. In May 2019, the plaintiffs served a demand on AmerisourceBergen, requesting inspection of thirteen categories of books and records. AmerisourceBergen rejected the demand in its entirely, claiming that the demand did not state a proper purpose and that the scope of the inspection was overbroad. Plaintiffs filed this action, seeking to compel production of the requested documents.
- 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.