SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Associations Keyed to Bainbridge
Miller v. McDonald’s Corp.
Citation:
945 P.2d 1107 (1997)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:
3K owned and operated the restaurant under a License Agreement with defendant that required it to operate in a manner consistent with the “McDonald’s System.” The Agreement described the way in which 3K was to operate the restaurant in considerable detail. Despite these detailed instructions, the Agreement provided that 3K was not an agent of defendant for any purpose; rather it was an independent contractor and was responsible for all obligations and liabilities resulting from the operation of the restaurant. Plaintiff went to the restaurant under the assumption that defendant owed, controlled and managed it. The restaurant’s appearance was similar to that of other McDonald’s restaurants. The only signs that were visible to the public had the name “McDonald’s,” the employees wore uniforms with McDonald’s insignia, and the menu was the same that plaintiff had seen in other McDonald’s restaurants. Plaintiff suffered an injury while eating a Big Mac Sandwich and contended that defendant is liable responsible for damages.
- 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.
56s
