Confirm favorite deletion?
Professional Responsibility Keyed to Hazard
Committee on Professional Ethics and Conduct of Iowa State Bar Assn. v. Mershon
Facts
Mershon (Defendant) was an attorney who performed tax and property work for Miller, a farmer who owned 100 acres of vacant land near a Cedar Falls country club. Miller decided to develop this land as a residential township. He met with Mershon (Defendant) and Schenk, an engineer, to discuss the project. The men decided to form a corporation that would develop the land continent upon their ability to borrow money based on the land as security. Miller conveyed the land to the corporation at a capitalized value of $12,500 and received 400 shares of stock. Schenk and Mershon (Defendant) both gave the corporation their promissory notes for $12,500 and $6,250 in return for 400 and 200 shares of stock, respectively. The promissory notes were interest-free and due at the discretion of the corporation and were to represent the services provided by Schenk and Mershon (Defendant). The deal fell through when the three were not able to secure financing unless they personally guaranteed the development loan, which they were reluctant to do. Miller died afterwards, and the land was valued at $4,000/acre at his death. Defendant, who believed the parties had an oral understanding that if the development did not occur they would reconvey their interests in the corporation to Miller, transferred his stock to the corporation and canceled his note. However, Schenk refused to do the same. Despite Schenk’s position, Defendant, as executor of Miller’s will, showed Miller as sole owner of the corporate stock in the initial probate inventory. The Iowa State Bar Grievance Commission, after an investigation and hearing, decided to reprimand Defendant for failing to obtain Miller’s consent to his ownership in the development corporation after full disclosure. Mershon (Defendant) appealed
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.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.