Confirm favorite deletion?
Torts keyed to Best
Slack v. Farmers Insurance Exchange
Citation:5 P.3d 280 (Colo. 2000)
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:
Juliette Slack suffered neck and back injuries in an automobile accident. The following day, Slack visited her chiropractor for treatment of her injuries. On her chiropractor’s submission of charges to Farmers Insurance, Slack’s insurer, Farmers chose to obtain a second opinion on Slack’s injuries from an independent examiner.
For a second opinion on her injuries, Farmers referred Slack to Dr. Lloyd Lachow. During the examination, Lachow allegedly sexually assaulted Slack. At the time of the examination, Slack had an outstanding sexual assault allegation against him from another individual insured by Farmers.
Slack sued both Lachow and Farmers. Slack alleged several intentional torts against Lachow, including battery and assault. Additionally, Slack claimed that Farmers was negligent in referring her to an examiner that Farmers knew or should have known had an outstanding sexual assault allegation against him. Slack settled with Lachow, and a jury found for Slack at trial. At trial, the jury apportioned sixty percent of the fault to Lachow and forty percent of the fault to Farmers. Slack appealed on the apportionment issue, and the court of appeals found for Farmers. Slack appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court.
- 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.