Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Blum
Feingold v. Pucello
Citation:439 Pa. Super 509, 654 A.2d 1093 (1995)
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:
Pucello was involved in a car accident. Feingold was a personal injury attorney. Feingold called Pucello about representing him in a case about the car accident and Pucello said he would call him back. Feingold recommended a doctor for Pucello and set up an appointment for him. Pucello and Feingold later talked about the possibility of Feingold representing him. Pucello gave him some basic information, but they did not discuss or sign a fee agreement. Feingold started working on the case for several weeks, including getting an admission of liability from the other driver. He then mailed a contingency fee agreement to Pucello. This agreement called for a 50/50 split of the recovery, which was unusually high for the industry. Pucello then found other counsel and told Feingold he could keep the evidence he had worked on. Feingold then sued.
- 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.