Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Organizations Keyed to Smith
Blair v. Infineon Techs, AG
Citation:720 F.Supp.2d 462
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:
Infineon Technologies, AG formed Qimonda AG. Infineon maintained 77.5 percent of Qimonda’s stock, selected three of its own corporate officers as board members with Qimonda, and claimed the company and other subsidiaries as the “Infineon Group” on financial statements. The two company’s shared operations and other corporate functions. When Qimonda began to falter, several employees were laid off at the direction of Infineon Technologies AG. Several employees were offered severance packages and paid expenses for relocation, but the company allegedly did not follow through on these promises. Blair, one such former employee, filed suit against Infineon and Qimonda AG for alleged violations of state and federal employment laws. Infineon claimed it was not liable based on its role as a mere parent company of Qimonda.
- 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.