Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Barnett
Martin v. Little, Brown and Co.
Citation:Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 304 Pa. Super. 424, 450 A.2d 984 (1981)
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:
On September 28, 1976, Martin sent a letter to Bantam Books, advising them that portions of a book entitled “How to Buy Stocks” had been plagiarized by the authors of a later book entitled “Planning Your Financial Future.” Martin offered to provide a copy of the book in which Martin had highlighted the plagiarized passages with references to the pages and paragraphs of the book from which they had been copied. On October 21, 1976, Robin Paris, Editorial Assistant of Little, invited Martin to send his copy. Martin did so, and Little acknowledged receipt in writing. Afterwards, Martin made inquiries about the investigation but received no response. Once Martin learned that Little was pursuing a claim for copyright infringement, he demanded compensation for his services. Little denied that it had contracted with Martin or was otherwise obligated to compensate him. Nevertheless, Little offered an honorarium in the form of a check for two hundred dollars, which Martin didn’t cash. Instead, he filed suit to recover one-third of the recovery from the copyright infringement lawsuit.
- 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.