Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Frier
Hamer v. Sidway
Citation:124 N.Y. 538, 27 N.E. 256
ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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:
William E. Story II (Willie) made assignments of money to Plaintiff based on money he was to receive from his uncle. Several years previously, Willie’s uncle promised him that if he would abstain from “drinking, using tobaccos, swearing, and playing cards or billiards for money” until he reached 21, he would be paid $5,000. Willie agreed and fully honored the promise. At that time, Willie wrote to his uncle and informed him that he had upheld his promise. His uncle wrote back and said that he was entitled to the $5,000 and that the money was being held for him at a bank. However, Willie’s uncle said that it would not be paid to him until he felt Willie was capable of “taking care of it.” Willie agreed, and the money remained at the bank. Willie’s uncle died without paying him the money, and this claim was brought by Plaintiff to Defendant. Defendant rejected the claim, and Plaintiff brought suit in New York state court seeking to enforce the promise to Willie. The trial court upheld the promise, but the appellate court reversed. Hamer appealed to the New York Court of Appeals (which is the state’s supreme court for New York).
- 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.