Confirm favorite deletion?
Corporations Keyed to Hazen
Martin v. Peyton
Citation:158 N.E. 77 (1927)
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 1921, the firm of K. N. & K. found itself in financial difficulties. John R. Hall was one of its partners. He was a friend of Peyton. From him he obtained the loan of $500,000 of liberty bonds, which K. N. & K. might use as collateral to secure bank advances. Hall was also acquainted with George W. Perkins, Jr. and with and Edward W. Freeman. He also knew Mrs. Peyton and Mrs. Perkins and Mrs. Freeman. All were anxious to help him. He therefore, representing K. N. & K., entered into negotiations with them. A proposition was made that Mr. Peyton, Mr. Perkins, and Mr. Freeman or some of them should become partners. It met a decided refusal. Finally an agreement was reached, under which the respondents were to loan K. N. & K. $2,500,000 worth of liquid securities. In compensation for the loan the respondents were to receive 40 percent of the profits of the firm. when K. N. & K. was forced into dissolution, the depositors and creditors then brought suit against Peyton, Perkins and Freeman in an attempt to hold them personally liable for the firm’s debts.
- 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.