SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Conflict of Laws Keyed to Brilmayer
Hurtado v. Superior Court
Citation:
11 Cal. 3d 574, 522 P.2d 666, 114 Cal. Rptr. 106 (1974)Facts
On January 19, 1969 in Sacramento County, California, Antonio Hurtado died as a result of a car accident. Antonio was a passenger in a car owned and operated by his cousin, Manuel Hurtado. Manuel’s car, which was being driven along a two-lane paved road, collided with a pickup truck owned and operated by Jack Rexius. Jack’s car was parked partially on the side of the road and partially on the pavement. Upon impact, Jack’s pickup truck collided with another parked car that was operated by Jack’s son but owned by Jack.
Antonio, his wife, and his children were all residents and domiciliaries of Mexico. Antonio, at the time of the accident, was in California temporarily as a visitor. All of the vehicles involved in the accident were registered in California. Manuel, Jack, and Jack’s son were all residents of the state of California.
Plaintiffs, Antonio Hurtado’s widow and children, brought suit in California state court for damages for the wrongful death of Antonio. Defendants, Manuel Hurtado and Jack Rexius, both denied liability. Hurtado moved for a separate trial on the issue of whether the measure of damages was to be applied according to the laws of the state of California or the laws of Mexico. The trial court granted Hurtado’s motion, and during the trial, the trial court took judicial notice of the relevant Mexican law prescribing the maximum limitation of damages for wrongful death. The trial court established that the maximum amount recoverable under Mexican law would be $1,946.72. The trial court then filed a memorandum opinion ruling that it would apply a measure of damages in accordance with California law and not Mexican law. Hurtado appealed. The Court of Appeal found in favor of Hurtado, and directed the trial court to apply Mexican law. Antonio’s widow and children appealed to the California Supreme Court.
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.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 Outline 