Confirm favorite deletion?
Civil Procedure Keyed to Glannon
Sacramona v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.
Citation:152 F.R.D. 428 (D. Mass. 1993)
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:
Plaintiff allegedly sustained permanent and serious injuries due to an explosion that occurred when he was mounting a tire on a rim. During discovery, Defendants learned that Plaintiff was a former abuser of injectable drugs; Plaintiff also admitted to being bisexual and engaging in unprotected homosexual activity. Plaintiff had never submitted to a blood test to determine his HIV status. Defendants sought to compel an HIV blood test, asserting the information that would be obtained was essential to their ability to defend against alleged future damages. Defendants contended that Plaintiff’s HIV status was relevant to his life expectancy and to determining future damages, and that Plaintiff put this matter in issue, so it was not burdensome or prejudicial to request the blood test. Plaintiff argued that the blood test was an invasion of his privacy rights. Defendants filed a motion to compel Plaintiff to submit to a blood test.
- 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.