SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Ayres
Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. G.W. Thomas Drayage & Rigging Co.
Citation:
69 Cal.2d 33.ProfessorMelissa A. Hale
CaseCast™ – "What you need to know"
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 defendant entered into a contract with the plaintiff to furnish the labor and equipment necessary to remove and replace the upper metal cover of the plaintiff’s steam turbine. The defendant agreed to perform the work at its own risk and expense and indemnify the plaintiff against all loss, damage, expense and liability resulting from injury to the property arising out of or in anyway connected with the performance of this contract. The defendant also got insurance for the property and added the plaintiff as an additional named insured. The policy also included coverage extending to the plaintiff’s property. During the work , the cover fell and injured the exposed rotor of the turbine. The plaintiff brought this action to recover approximately $25,000. During trial, the defendant offered to prove by admission of the plaintiff’s agents, by defendant’s conduct under similar contracts entered into with the plaintiff, and by other proof that in the indemnity clause the parties meant to cover injury to property of third parties only and not to plaintiff’s property. The court refused to admit any extrinsic evidence.
- 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.