Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Saxer
Marvin M Brandt Revocable Trust v. United States
Citation:572 U.S. 93
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:
The 1875 General Railroad Right-of-Way Act permitted the Federal Government to create right-of-ways for railroads, and in 1908 an a railroad company was granted such and built rail lines through the land which would come to be owned by the Brandts. In 1976 the Federal Government issued a patent for land transferring it to the Brandt family; included in the patent was language subjecting the land to a right-of-way for the railroad currently using the tracks, and any successors in interest to do the same. The patent did not, however, include language that would permit the Federal Government to claim a reversionary interest in the right-of-way. In 2004, the railroad formally abandoned the tracks passing through the right-of-way. The US Forest Service planned to turn the land into a park, and the Federal Government sought to quiet title of the right-of-way for itself. Brandt counterclaimed, seeking full ownership of the abandoned right-of-way.
- 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.