Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Sprankling
Ernst v. Conditt
Citation:390 S.W.2d 703 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1965)
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:
Plaintiffs B. Walter Ernst and wife, Emily Ernst leased a tract of land to Frank D. Rogers for a term of one year and 7 days. Rogers operated a business there for a short time, then sought to sell the business to Defendant A. J. Conditt. Plaintiffs consented to Rogers and Defendant’s request to amend the lease for Rogers to “sublet” the premise to Defendant. The amended lease provided that Rogers “will remain personally liable for the faithful performance of all the terms and conditions of the original lease and this amendment.” Defendant took over Rogers’ business and paid rent directly to Plaintiffs for three months, then ceased paying rent altogether. After Defendant failed to respond to Plaintiffs’ demand for a settlement of past due rent, Plaintiffs filed a suit in court, seeking a recovery of the due balance. The trial court entered judgment for Plaintiffs. Defendant appealed, insisting that the trial court had erred in holding the instrument of transfer to be an assignment rather than a sublease to Defendant.
- 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.