Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Erichson
International Shoe Co. v. Washington
Citation:326 U.S. 310 (1945)
ProfessorBrittany L. Raposa
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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:
International Shoe Co. (Plaintiff) was a Delaware corporation that conducted a small amount of its business in the state of Washington. Some of International Shoe’s salesmen resided in Washington and rented rooms in local hotels to display the company’s merchandise. The state of Washington (Defendant), by statute, imposed a tax on corporations that conducted business within the state. Washington also had statutes establishing the procedure for service of process to notify a corporation that it had overdue taxes–the employer had to be personally notified, and if they could not be found, mail could be sent to the employer’s last known address. International Shoe did not pay its taxes; a sales representative was notified of this in person, and mail was sent to International Shoe’s primary address. International Shoe sued Washington, arguing that it could not be taxed by the state because it was not a Washington corporation and was not doing business within the state. It also argued that the service of process upon the International Shoe salesman was not proper service.
- 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.