SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Entities Keyed to Chiappinelli
CSX Transp., Inc. v. Recovery Express, Inc.
Citation:
415 F.Supp. 2d 6 (D. Mass. 2006)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:
CSX is in the business of selling out-of-service railcars and parts. Recovery is Massachusetts corporation. IDEC had its principal place of business at the same address in Boston. It is now defunct. IDEC and Recovery shares offices in Boston. On August 22, 2003, Albert Arillotta at IDEC sent an email to Len Whitehead of CSX expressing interest in buying railcars as scrap. The email address from which Arillotta sent this inquiry was “[email protected]” Arillotta and Whitehead proceeded with the deal. When later found, Recovery and IDEC refused to pay CSX. CSX brought this action alleging breach of contract. Recovery claims that Arillotta never worked for it. How Arillotta acquired a Recovery email address is explained thus: Marto and Thomas R. Trafton, Recovery’s President, became involved in another venture along with Arillotta and Dominic Ignagni –IDEC. Because of Marto’s and Trafton’s personal interest in IDEC, the fledging company was allowed to share the offices and some resources of Recovery.
- 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.
2m 11s