Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Underwood
Hodges v. Carter
Citation:80 S.E.2d 144 (N.C. 1954)
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 plaintiff owned a drugstore. One day, the plaintiff’s store was destroyed by a fire. At the time, the plaintiff was insured under four policies of fire insurance against loss of or damage to, said mercantile building and its contents. The plaintiff filed proof of loss with each of the four insurance companies which issued said policies. The insurance companies rejected the proofs of loss an declined to pay any part of the plaintiff’s losses resulting from said fire. The plaintiff later hired the defendant lawyers to institute legal actions against these insurers. The complaints and summons together with copies thereof, were mailed to the Commissioner of Insurance of the State of North Carolina. The Commissioner accepted service of summons and complaint in each case and forwarded a copy thereof by registered mail to the insurance company named defendant therein.
Each insurer moved to dismiss the action against it for want of proper service of process, arguing that the Insurance Commissioner was without authority, statutory or otherwise, to accept service of process issued against a foreign insurance company doing business in this state. The trial judge concluded that the service of process was sufficient. Judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff. However, the insurance companies appealed. The North Carolina Supreme Court reversed holding that the service of process was deficient. By the time of this Supreme Court decision, the applicable statute of limitations had run. Therefore, the plaintiff could not bring a new claim against the insurers.
- 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.