Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Duncan
Beal v. Kansas City Southern Railway Company
Citation:527 S.W.3d 883 (Mo. App. 2017)
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:
Theresa Beal (plaintiff) was hit by a train while driving over a railway crossing. Video evidence from the train shows parked cars and vegetation near the crossing and that the plaintiff did not stop at the stop sign before crossing the train tracks. The plaintiff sued the Kansas City Southern Railway Company, Kansas City Southern, Capital Railroad Contracting Inc., and Ironhorse, Inc. (defendants) for negligently failing to keep an unobstructed view of the right-of-way, failing to inspect the crossing, failing to warn of the dangerous condition of crossing, and failing to properly maintain and update the crossing and its traffic control. The defendants moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff was negligent per se for violating the legal requirement to stop before crossing the train tracks.
- 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.