Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Rowe
Grutter v. Bollinger
Citation:188 F.3d 394 (6th Cir. 1999)
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:
Grutter (Plaintiff) was a white woman who was rejected by the University of Michigan Law School. She filed suit against the dean, Lee Bollinger (Defendant), challenging the law school’s pro-affirmative action admissions policy and alleging that it discriminated against her based on race in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Then, 41 students and three pro-affirmative action coalitions filed motions to intervene in the lawsuit, which the plaintiff opposed but the defendants did not. The intervenors argued that the resolution of the case directly threatened the access of qualified minority students to public higher education, and that the Defendants would not adequately represent their interests. The district court denied the motion to intervene, and the proposed intervenors appealed.
- 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.