Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Dawson
Strouth v. Pools by Murphy and Sons, Inc.
Citation:79 Conn. App. 55, 829 A.2d 102.
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:
On May 19, 1998 the plaintiffs met with defendant’s salesman, Ed Carter, regarding installation of a custom pool. After viewing defendant’s brochure, the plaintiffs contracted with defendant to install a peanut-shaped pool with a circular spa on their property. On July 16, 1998, the defendant began excavation at which time defendant’s president, Dennis Murphy, showed plaintiff Caroline Strouth a picture of a kidney-shaped pool. Caroline advised Dennis the picture was not what she was expecting. Plaintiff Robert Strouth later called the defendant and spoke to Joseph Murphy, an employee of defendant, regarding an excavation bill. However, Joseph abruptly ended the call before Robert could express concerns regarding the pool’s shape. Four days later, Robert called defendants and ordered they discontinue all work on the property. Ed Carter subsequently called the plaintiffs several times attempting to work out completion of the pool. On September 16, 1998, defendant’s sent a letter to plaintiffs offering to complete the pool with a circular spa.
- 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.