Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts keyed to Best
Klein v. Pyrodyne Corp.
Citation:117 Wash. 2d 1, 810 P.2d 917 (1991)
ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
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:
Pyrodene Corp. is a general contractor for aerial fireworks at public fireworks displays. They contract to procure fireworks, provide pyrotechnic operators, and put on the 4th of July fireworks displays at the Western Washington State Fairgrounds in Puyallup, Washington on July 4, 1987. All pyrotechnic operators working were acting in the scope of their employment with Pyrodene during the display and accident.
During the display, one of the 5-inch mortars was knocked into a horizontal position, where a shell inside was ignited and discharged. The shell flew for 500 feet parallel to the ground and exploded near a group of people watching the fireworks.
Danny and Marion Klein were injured by the explosion. Danny’s clothing was set on fire, he suffered facial burns and serious injury to his eyes. As a result, he and Marion filed suit against Pyrodene to recover damages for their injuries.
- 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.