Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Crosstex North Texas Pipeline v. Gardiner
Citation:505 S.W.3d 580
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:
The Gardiners purchased a 95 acre ranch. Crosstex subsequently “negotiated” with the Gardiners for an easement running through the back corner their property to run pipelines—”negotiated” under threat of condemnation by Crosstex. Unbeknownst to the Gardiners, Crosstex desired this easement because they planned to build a compressor station across the street from the Gardiners’ property. After Crosstex began operating the completed compressor station, Crosstex fielded complaints from the Gardiners and other property owners about the excessive noise and vibration the station emitted. The Gardiners alleged that the disturbance from the station diminished their property’s value and affected their ability to enjoy the property. The Gardiners did not allege that Crosstex had ignored their complaints, but rather that Crosstex’s mitigation efforts were insufficient.
- 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.