Confirm favorite deletion?
Business Organizations Keyed to Macey
Sullivan v. Hammer
Citation:1990 WL 114223 (1990)
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 April 25, 1989, defendant Occidental Petroleum Corporation mailed to its stockholders a proxy statement for the company’s 1989 annual meeting, which reported that a Special Committee of Occidental had approved a proposal to provide financial report for the Armand Hammer Museum of Art and Cultural Center. The proxy statement referred to the financial support that Occidental would provide to the Museum and set forth a description of Hammer’s employment agreements. Plaintiffs filed this action asserting that Occidental’s expenditures and commitments with respect to the Museum pursuant to Hammer’s employment contract constitute a waste of corporate assets and that Hammer had breached his duty of loyalty by causing Occidental to make these expenditures for his personal benefit. On June 1989, the parties entered into a written agreement setting forth the general terms of a proposed settlement.
- 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.