Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Summers
Paul Gottlieb & Co., Inc. v. Alps South Corp.
Citation:985 So. 2d 1
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:
Alps South Corporation (“Alps”) (defendant) manufactured medical devices and also produced liners for prosthetic devices. Alps contracted to use a new specialty fabric from Paul Gottlieb & Company, Inc. (“Gottlieb”) (plaintiff) for the production of prosthetic devices. The parties exchanged their own standardized forms. Gottlieb’s form contained a a limitation of liabilities clause that shielded it from liability for consequential damages, but Alps did not read the clause. The parties’ business relationship later deteriorated. Alps became unsatisfied in the deficiencies in the fabric and also received complaints from customers that the fabric was less comfortable. The problems with the fabric became so severe that Alps recalled its products and destroyed the remaining devices in its inventory. When Gottlieb sent Alps a bill, Alps failed to pay. Gottlieb sued to collect damages due to the nonpayment. Gottlieb asserted that the clause on the back of its finished goods contract limited its liability for consequential damages. The trial court concluded the clause was a material alteration and was not part of the contract.
- 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.