Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts keyed to Robertson
Meyering v. General Motors Corp.
Citation:Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 1, California, 1990. 232 Cal.App.3d 1163, 275 Cal.Rptr. 346.
The Plaintiff, Kurt Meyering, was severely injured when a chunk of concrete struck him on the head. The chunk of concrete was thrown from a freeway overpass by two juveniles. At the time he was injured, the Plaintiff was driving a 1984 Chevrolet Corvette manufactured by the Defendant, General Motors Corp. The concrete chunk struck the Plaintiff after penetrating the car’s sunroof. The Plaintiff complained that the Defendant was negligent in the design, manufacture, and distribution of the vehicle. The Plaintiff’s theory was that the sunroom was made from a plexiglass that was too thin and too weak.
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.