Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Blum
Drennan v. Star Paving Co.
Citation:51 Cal. 2d 409, 333 P.2d 757 (1958)
ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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 plaintiff, a general contractor, was preparing a bid for a project on a school. In order to create their bid, they had to get bids from subcontractors to understand how much they would have to charge for their services. They got a phone call from the defendant, who was bidding to do the paving work, with a bid of $7,131.60. It was the lowest paving bid. Relying on the defendant’s bid, the plaintiff computed his own bid, submitted it, and won the project. The plaintiff then stopped at the defendant’s office. The defendant told the plaintiff they had made a mistake on their bid and could not do the work for as low of a price as they had stated. The plaintiff told the defendant that they had relied on the number they had been given and had won the contract, so they expected them to do the work for that amount. The defendant refused to work for less than $15,000. The plaintiff eventually found another company to do the work for $10,948.60 and then brought this claim.
- 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.