Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts Keyed to Christie
Matsuyama v. Birnbaum
Citation:452 Mass. 1, 890 N.E.2d 819 (2008)
Matsuyama visited his primary care physician, Dr. Birnbaum (Defendant), between 1995 and 1999 with complaints of gastric pain. The Defendant was aware of Matsuyama’s risk of gastric cancer but failed to order the appropriate tests until May 1999, which confirmed that Matsuyama had a cancerous mass in his stomach. Matsuyama died in October 1999. Matsuyama’s wife (Plaintiff) brought a medical malpractice lawsuit against the Defendants for wrongful death, breach of contract, and negligence. The Plaintiff had an expert testify that the Defendant breached the applicable standard of care, decreasing Matsuyama’s chance of survival.
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.
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.