SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Fuller
Garwood Packaging, Inc. v. Allen & Company, Inc.
Citation:
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, 2004. 378 F.3d 698.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:
Garwood Packaging, Inc. (Plaintiff) created a packaging system designed to increase the shelf life of fresh meat, but it was not profitable, and had $3 million in debt. Plaintiff hired Allen & Company, Inc. (Defendant), an investment company, to find investors for its business. After searching for investors, defendant told plaintiff it would consider investing 2 million of its own money if another investor could be found to make a comparable investment. Hobart Corp. was another company willing to invest in plaintiff; however, Hobart insisted on obtaining releases from plaintiff’s current creditors before investing. Several of plaintiff’s creditors were unwilling to sign releases; however, defendant assured plaintiff that the deal would go through come “hell or high water.” Defendant ended up withdrawing its $2 million investment and the deal fell through. Plaintiff sued defendant based on promissory estoppel.
- 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.
12m 9s