Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Epstein
Reed v. University of North Dakota and the North Dakota Association for the Disabled, Inc.
Citation:589 N.W.2d 880 (1999)
The plaintiff, Jace Reed, was a student at the University of North Dakota (UND) on a hockey scholarship. As part of UND’s preseason conditioning program, Reed ran in a ten-kilometer race sponsored by the North Dakota Association for the Disabled (NDAD). As a result of the race, Reed himself became disabled, suffering extensive damage to his body. He required one kidney and two liver transplants. Reed sued NDAD on a tort theory, alleging that NDAD negligently failed to provide adequate medical services and water at the race side. NDAD defended on a contract theory, alleging that the race registration form that Reed signed was a contract releasing NDAD from any liability.
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.