Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Blum
Sound Techniques, Inc. v. Hoffman
Citation:50 Mass. App. 425, 737 N.E.2d 920 (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:
In 1989, Anderson (Appellee’s president), who operated a professional recording studio, was shown the second floor of a building Appellant owned by McGloin. The first floor was occupied by a bar called Ramrod. McGloin showed Anderson the building several times, and Anderson clarified that Appellant was seeking space to build a state-of-the-art studio. Anderson noticed that Ramrod was being renovated and asked McGloin about it, but McGloin told Anderson not to worry because the dining area was expanding.
On October 10, 1989, when the lease was signed, Appellee was represented by counsel that assisted in the negotiations and reviewed the contract terms. The lease was conditioned upon Appellee completing an acoustical inspection of the space before October 13, 1989. Appellee’s acoustic engineer completed a brief assessment, but did not visit Ramrod during the night or weekend, did not measure the ambient sound level, and did not talk with Ramrod about the sound system.
After moving into the space, Appellee experienced problems with noise coming from Ramrod. Appellee also discovered that contrary to McGloin’s representations, Ramrod expanded its sound system and dance floor. Appellee began losing customers due to the disruptions and subsequently filed suit against Appellant. However, a clause in the lease stated that Appellee acknowledged that he had not been influenced to enter the transaction and that Appellee did no rely on any representations outside the contract.
- 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.