Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Dawson
Kelly v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance Co.
Citation:734 F. Supp. 2d 1085.
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:
Plaintiff was a General Agent for General American Life Insurance Company. In the early 1980s, defendant issued plaintiff two own-occupation disability insurance policies that would provide a combined benefit of $5,500 per month in the event plaintiff became disabled. In May 1986, plaintiff began seeing a psychologist and was diagnosed with depression, dysthymic disorder, and schizoid personality disorder. In September 1986, plaintiff filed for complete disability and began receiving benefits. Defendant paid on plaintiff’s disability claim for thirteen years, however it investigated plaintiff’s claim during that time. During its investigation defendant notified various law enforcement agencies suggesting that plaintiff was committing insurance fraud. On August 18, 1999, defendant sent plaintiff a letter terminating his benefits. Plaintiff and plaintiff’s doctor sent a number of letters in response. In November 2000, defendant sued plaintiff and his insurance companies for various claims of fraud and conspiracy. Plaintiff contacted defendant’s lawyer seeking a settlement and plaintiff was advised that defendant would put its case on hold while the lawyer looked into settlement. On April 11, 2001, plaintiff learned that a default judgment had been entered against him and the companies causing plaintiff to become distressed. On July 2 and July 5, 2001, plaintiff and defendant’s attorney attended evaluation conferences with the judge and a settlement agreement was reached on November 21, 2001.
- 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.