Confirm favorite deletion?
Criminal Law Keyed to Osler
United States v. Chaplin
Citation:25 F.3d 1373 (7th Cir. 1994)
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:
Defendant owned a firm that contracted with the state of Wisconsin to built put toilets in several state parks. In May 1990, the state declared the contracts to be in default because the work had not been completed. The state started a lawsuit against the company the defendant owned, Transamerica Premiere Insurance, who then started a lawsuit with the defendant. The state was seeking, amongst other things, the return of materials that were delivered to the construction site, including doors, toilets, and urinals. At a state court hearing on the matter, defendant testified that the materials were in a trailer in the overflow parking area of the Peninsula State Park, but no materials or trailer were found there.
Because of the lawsuits, defendant filed for bankruptcy on October 15, 1990. Transamerica filed a proof of claim and initiated two adversary proceedings. In those bankruptcy proceedings, the defendant was asked under oath whether he gave his father in law Joseph Voss $8,000 in cash on October 23, 1990; whether a photo taken by his landlord AL Payment depicting construction materials in his garage were the materials the state wanted back; and whether he removed materials from his residential garage. To all three he said “I do not recall, no”.
To substantiate those claims, Voss testified that the defendant gave him $8,000 sometime in October of 1990, and bank records show that Voss deposited $8,000 on October 23rd, 1990. Additionally Payment testified to seeing materials labeled in the garage as the defendants that appeared to be outhouse inserts and door frames. These items were in a photo he took and furnished at trial, though the name labels were not apparent in the photo. Lastly, a neighbor testified that he saw the defendant leave his house with what he thought were door frames in his trunk. Defendant was charged and convicted of three perjury charges for his answers to those questions.
- 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.