Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Epstein
Ellefson v. Megadeth, Inc.
Citation:2005 WL 82022 (2005)
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 and defendant David Mustaine are original members of the heavy metal rock band Megadeth. The band was initially formed in 1983 and the parties formed a formal corporation, Megadeth, Inc.m with Mustaine receiving 80% of the stock and Ellefson 20%. Beginning in October of 2003, plaintiff and defendants entered into negotiations to settle the various disputes between them. By April of 2004, parties began to focus on a buy-out of plaintiff’s share of Megadeth, Inc. Plaintiff’s attorney received an initial draft of a proposed settlement agreement. Megadeth set the deadline on Friday, May 14, 2004, for completion of the settlement. Plaintiff’s attorney sent defendants’ attorney an email with a finalized, execution copy of the agreement at 4:45 pm, 15 minutes prior to expiration of the offer. In the final email of the day between the attorneys, the plaintiff’s attorney sent defendants’ attorney an email stating that “Dave Ellefson told me he signed and faxed the signature page to you.” The email was dated Friday, May 14, 2004 5:16 p.m. A dispute arose whether the fax was sent prior to the 5 p.m. deadline.
- 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.