Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Organizations Keyed to Sjostrom
Elting v. Elting
Citation:849 N.W.2d 444 (Neb. 2014)
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:
In 1976, Glenn Elting and Sons, a farming partnerhsip, was formed among Glenn and his two sons, Kerwin and Perry. Before the partnership dissolved in late 2007, the partnership began banking with the First National Bank of Fairbury. The partnership worked primarily with Dick Hoppe. FNB determined that the partnership was creditworthy and the 2007 balance sheet was signed by Glenn, Perry, and Kerwin, who were managing partners at that time. The 2008 balance sheet reflected the price of the Cargill corn after the gains and losses from the May 2008 Focal Point contracts. After the proceedings to dissolve the partnership began, Kerwin and Carl began farming together and Perry and Knud began farming together. In Hoppe’s review of Perry and Knud’s financial information, he noticed that their numbers differed from Kerwin and Carl’s numbers with respect to the price of the contracted corn. The appellees filed their complaint against Kerwin, alleging that Perry and Knud had not been consulted regarding whether the partnership should enter into the Focal Point contracts and that Kerwin lacked authority to enter into the Focal Point contracts on behalf of the partnership.
- 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.