Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Yeazell
Cerrato v. Nutribullet, LLC
Citation:2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64882 (M.D. Fla. Apr. 27, 2017); 2017 WL 3608266 (M.D. Fla. 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:
Plaintiff Phyllis was allegedly injured while using the Nutribullet Pro 900, a blender produced by Defendant. The blender allegedly exploded and resulted in hot liquids severely burning Phyllis Cerrato’s face and upper body, as well as causing property damage to the Plaintiffs’ kitchen. Plaintiffs brought a products-liability suit against Defendant. Among other things, Plaintiffs alleged that she was unable to untwist the blender’s cup from the base to turn it off. Defendant filed the instant motion to dismiss, arguing that Plaintiffs fabricated evidence to support their claims and committed fraud on the court. During discovery, Plaintiffs requested, among other things, (1) “[a]ll accident reports and records relating to any injury allegedly caused by the product,” and (2) “[a]ll consumer complaints of any type relating to the product.” Defendant objected to the requests as overbroad and not proportional to the needs of the case. Plaintiffs filed a motion to compel the production of the information.
- 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.