Confirm favorite deletion?
Family Law Keyed to Weisberg
Melbourne v. Neal or Melbourne v. Taylor
Citation:147 A.3d 1151 (D.C. Ct. App. 2016)
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:
Melbourne and Taylor were married and living together when their daughter was born on May 11, 2012. They later filed for divorce. Following the divorce, Melbourne filed the name change application for the daughter and testifies that she wished to change the child’s last name to hers in order to avoid what had been a recurring problem where someone assumed, incorrectly, that she and the child had the same last name and she was temporarily hindered as the custodial parent. Taylor testified that he opposed the name change because he and Melbourne agreed that Melbourne would pick their daughter’s first/middle names and that the child would hear his last name. Taylor also testified that he made an effort to be a part of the child’s life but was stalled by Melbourne, while Melbourne testified that he had not manifested a continuing interest in the child (no calls, emails, or other contact in order to facilitate a father-daughter relationship). Taylor also testified that if the child’s name was changed he would not treat his daughter any differently, but that he thought their relationship would be diminished if her last name was changed.
- 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.