Confirm favorite deletion?
Constitutional Law Keyed to Maggs
Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
Citation:561 U.S. 477 (2010)
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:
The Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 created a new five-member “Public Company Accounting Oversight Board” to supervise the accounting industry. The board has five members, appointed to 5-year terms by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Board has the power to enforce the Act, the rules of the Board, and provisions of the securities laws relating to the preparation and issuance of audit credits and obligations and liabilities of accountants. The SEC has supervisory authority over the Board’s functions, but can remove Board members only for good cause shown. The Commissioners who make up the SEC have similar protection for their positions. The Court has held that Congress can, under certain circumstances, create independent agencies run by principal officers appointed by the President, whom the President may not remove at all but only for good cause.
- 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.