Confirm favorite deletion?
Evidence Keyed to Best
Sphere Drake Insurance v. Trisko
Citation:226 F.3d 951 (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:
Trisko, a jewelry designer who showed and sold jewelry across the country, finished a show in Miami. Following the show, Trisko and another employee loaded two suitcases of jewelry into the trunk of a rental car. The men waited for a car with other employees to arrive, so they could all drive to the airport together. The men waited inside of the rental car, until eventually the employees were dropped off. After driving to the airport, it was discovered the two suitcases in the trunk containing the jewelry were gone. The jewelry was insured by Sphere Drake, who would not cover the loss which it classified as a mysterious disappearance or unexplained loss. At trial, Crowley testified that in his expert opinion, the jewelry was likely stolen, which would have been covered under the insurance policy. Crowley’s expert opinion was based on years of experience investigating jewelry theft in the area, as well as statements made by informants that the jewelry was stolen.
- 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.