Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Merrill
Penn Bowling Recreation Center, Inc. v. Hot Shoppes, Inc.
Citation:179 F.2d 64
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 appellant, Penn Bowling, was the owner of a dominant parcel benefitting from an easement providing for ingress and egress. The appellee, Hot Shoppes, was the owner of the servient parcel. Penn Bowling expanded its operation such that it also had a building located partly on and partly off the dominant parcel for which it also used the easement to bring in supplies. Hot Shoppes also ran a business which required its use of the easement to make deliveries. Penn Bowling also had its trucks parking in the easement at times. Hot Shoppes erected iron posts and cement concrete blocks within the easement preventing Penn Bowling’s full use and enjoyment of the easement. Penn Bowling sued, Hot Shoppes filed a motion for summary judgment claiming Penn Bowling’s misuse of the easement resulted in forfeiture.
- 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.