Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Barnett
Smith v. Wheeler
Citation:Supreme Court of Georgia, 233 Ga. 166, 210 S.E.2d 702 (1974)
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:
Wheeler and Smith entered into an option agreement on March 17, 1973 by which Wheeler gave Smith a one-year option to buy Wheeler’s property in Rockdale County in consideration of $1. The $1 was not paid. On May 22, 1973, Wheeler, through his attorney, informed Smith in a letter that due to the fact Smith had never paid the $1 he would take the position that the option agreement was not enforceable. Wheeler went on to state that he intended to sell the property to another individual and that Smith had no legal rights in the property. On March 11, 1974, Smith sent Wheeler notice by registered mail that he was prepared to exercise his option to buy the property and enclosed $1. Smith stated that he was ready to pay $30,000 in cash and that the closing was scheduled for 11 A.M. on March 15, 1974 at a local bank. Wheeler refused to receive delivery on the letter, and filed a complaint asking that the option agreement be declared a nullity due to the failure to deliver $1 as consideration.
- 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.