SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts keyed to Best
Hanley v. Citizens Bank of Massachusetts
Citation:
2001 W.I. 717106 (Mass Super.)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:
On February 10, 1990, Plaintiff was employed as a security guard by Metropolitan at Somerset Savings Bank. The previous night, police responded to an alarm sounded at the bank, however police were unable to enter the bank because no bank representative was present to allow entry into the building.
The next morning, Plaintiff arrived on scene and was disarmed, kicked, threatened at gun point as the robbers committed the crime. The group was an infamous “gang,” known for cutting a hole in the roof of Boston area banks at night and waiting for employees to arrive in the morning.
Plaintiff learned of the bank’s failure to provide police entry that same morning or following day. The first jury trial for the group began on March 17, 1997. Plaintiff filed the negligence claim on March 14, 2000.
- 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.
3m 43s
