Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Law Keyed to Singer
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co.
Citation:817 N.W.2d 693 (Minn. 2012)
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:
In 2007, the Cooperative applied pesticides to conventional farm fields near the Johnson’s organic farm. In June 2007, the Johnson’s filed a complaint with the Minnesota Department of Agriculture alleging the Cooperative contaminated their soybean field through a pesticide drift. Tests revealed that a pesticide chemical was present on the soybeans and there was visual damage to the soybeans. In response, the Johnson’s organic certifying agent directed the Johnson’s to destroy the soybean crop and restart the 3 year transition to organic. In July 2008, the Johnson’s reported another incident of contamination on their alfalfa field. There were no signs of physical damage, but some chemicals were present, and the Johnson’s took the alfalfa out of organic production for an additional 3 years. In addition, the Johnson’s alleged they experienced a spur in weed growth due to the small dosage of pesticides, were burdened with additional record-keeping, and Oluf Johnson experienced “cotton mouth, swollen throat and headaches.”
- 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.