Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Burton
Jungmann & Co. v. Atterbury Brothers, Inc.
Citation:249 N.Y. 119, 163 N.E. 123
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:
Jungmann & Company (hereinafter “Jungmann”) (plaintiff) entered into a written contract with Atterbury Brothers, Inc. (hereinafter “Atterbury”) (defendant) for the sale of thirty tons of casein (a type of protein). Pursuant to the contract, Jungmann was to provide notice of shipment of the casein by cable immediately once the goods were dispatched. On June 9, 1923, fifteen tons of casein were shipped. No notice of the shipment by cable was made to Atterbury, who refused the shipment. Atterbury wrote to Jungmann that they failed to advise them of the shipment as required by the parties’ contract. On June 23, 1923, Jungmann sent Atterbury a letter informing them about the next shipment. But no notice was provided by cable. On June 26, 1923, the remaining fifteen tons of casein were shipped. Atterbury refused to accept the thirty tons of casein. Jungmann sued Atterbury to recover the money owed for the casein.
- 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.