Confirm favorite deletion?
Constitutional Law Keyed to Rotunda
Hutchinson v. Proxmire
Facts
Hutchinson (Plaintiff), a behavioral scientist, sued Proxmire (Defendant), a United States senator, for defamation because Defendant gave Plaintiff’s federal sponsors a “Golden Fleece” award in 1975. The award was given to federal agencies that sponsored work that Defendant viewed as a waste of tax dollars. Defendant sent 100,000 newsletters, issued a press release, made TV and radio appearances, made phone calls, and spoke on the Senate floor about why he thought Plaintiff’s work was nonsense. The court of appeals held that the Speech or Debate Clause protected Defendant’s statements in the newsletters and press release, and that the First Amendment protected Defendant’s phone calls and TV and radio appearances.
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.