Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Henderson
Barton v. Bee Line, Inc.
Citation:238 App. Div. 501, 265 N.Y.S. 284 (1933)
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:
Barton (plaintiff) was a passenger of Bee Line, Inc.(defendant), a common carrier, when she was fifteen years old. Plaintiff claimed that she was raped by one of defendant’s chauffeurs.
Barton sued Bee Line for breach of duty as a common carrier.
The chauffeur claimed that plaintiff consented. Both parties agreed that, if the chauffeur raped plaintiff while she was a passenger, defendant would be liable in damages for failure to perform its duty as a common carrier to its passenger. The jury was instructed that plaintiff was entitled to a verdict even if she consented to consort with the chauffeur. As a result, the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff. The trial court set the verdict aside, stating that the amount was inadequate. Plaintiff appealed to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York.
- 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.