Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Whaley
Fiege v. Boehm
Citation:Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1956. 210 Md. 352, 123 A.2d 316.
Hilda Louise Boehm (Plaintiff) alleged that she was impregnated by Louis Gail Fiege (Defendant), and that the parties had agreed defendant would pay child support in exchange for plaintiff not bringing bastardy proceedings against him. Between 1951 and 1953, defendant paid plaintiff a total of $480. Defendant stopped the payments when a paternity blood test revealed that defendant was not in fact the father of plaintiff’s child. Defendant later claimed that he had taken the plaintiff out on dates, but he had not had sexual intercourse with her or entered into any agreement with her to pay child support.
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.
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.