Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Babcock
Jenkins v. The City of Jennings
Citation:Jenkins v. The City of Jennings, 4:15-cv-00252, Filed February 8, 2018 United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
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:
Plaintiffs, impoverished people, sue Defendant, City of Jennings, for violating a number of their constitutional rights, including their right to Due Process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. The City had a practice of arresting and jailing people that failed to pay traffic tickets and other minor violations. The impoverished people were not given counsel or an opportunity to be heard. They were told that despite their inability to pay that they would be detained indefinitely until they paid off their fines. Their bail amount changed daily and usually decreased the longer they were incarcerated. The city held a “confined docket” every week where some incarcerated people were brought before city clerks, the city prosecutor, and the city judge. The incarcerated people still were not given counsel or informed of their rights, instead they were again told they would be jailed indefinitely until they paid a certain amount of their debts off.
- 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.