SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Constitutional Law Keyed to Maggs
Gibbons v. Ogden
Citation:
22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 1 (1824)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 New York legislature in 1808 granted an exclusive right to Robert Livingston and Robert Fulton to operate steamboats in New York waters. Livingston and Fulton in turn licensed Ogden to operate a ferry between New York and Elizabethtown, New Jersey. Gibbons, who originally had been Ogden’s partner, began to operate a steamboat in competition with Ogden’s service. Ogden sued Gibbons, relying on his monopoly under New York state law. Gibbons responded by demonstrating that he had been granted a license to operate ferries as vessels to be employed in the coasting trade pursuant to a 1793 federal statute. If the statute meant that Gibbons was free to steam from state to state, it would have been impossible for a court to give effect both to Ogden’s monopoly rights and to Gibbon’s rights. Gibbons argued that Ogden’s exclusive right under New York law was preempted by the federal statute pursuant to the Supremacy Clause of Article VI.
- 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.
Topic Resources
Topic Videos 
8m 59s
9m 38s
