Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Ayres
Industrial America, Inc. v. Fulton Industries, Inc.
Citation:285 A.2d 412.
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 (Industrial America, but specifically the president Deutsch) was representing Bush Hog (B-H) in their search for a merger. While having lunch with a friend, the Plaintiff learned that the Defendant was a company looking to buy a product line that B-H could furnish. After the lunch, the Plaintiff found from his own files a copy of the Defendant’s advertisement in the newspaper, stating that the Defendant was looking to buy a product line that satisfied certain conditions, and providing an offer of guaranty that brokers would be fully protected. The Plaintiff and the Defendant then entered into preliminary communications where interest by Defendant in acquiring B-H was established. On October 26, the Plaintiff advised B-H of the Defendant’s interest and suggestion for a visit. After that communication, the Defendant then called B-H and entered into negotiations directly, thus freezing the Plaintiff out of the transaction. A merger was completed between the Defendant and B-H but neither company paid the Plaintiff the broker’s commission.
- 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.