SmartBrief
0
Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Whaley
Taylor v. Johnston
Citation:
California Supreme Court, 1975. 539 P.2d 425.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:
Taylor (Plaintiff) was engaged in the business of owning, breeding, raising and racing thoroughbred race horses in Los Angeles, CA. Plaintiff sought to breed his two thoroughbred mares, Sunday Slippers and Sandy Fork, to Johnston’s (Defendant) stallion Fleet Nasrullah. Defendant’s contract with plaintiff stated that his stallion was to perform breeding services with plaintiff’s mares for a fee of $3,500 each. Defendant proceeded to sell his horse to numerous shareholders. All shareholders were given the first option to breed with the horse. Defendant informed plaintiff that the horse had been sold and stated that plaintiff was “released” from his “reservations” for the horse. Plaintiff still wished to breed his mares with the horse, so the parties made arrangements for this to occur in Kentucky, where Fleet Nasrullah now resided. Plaintiff shipped his mares to Kentucky, but on four separate occasions, they were unable to be bred with Fleet Nasrullah because the horse was already booked by a shareholder.
- 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.
4m 14s