Confirm favorite deletion?
Contracts Keyed to Summers
Weintraub v. Krobatsch
Citation:64 N.J. 445, 317 A.2d 68
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:
Donald & Estella Krobatsch (collectively “the Krobatsches”) (defendants) were interested in purchasing Natalie Weintraub’s (plaintiff) six-year-old Englishtown home. The Krobatsches visited the home during daylight, found it suitable, and contracted with Weintraub for the sale of her home for $42,500. The Krobatsches paid a deposit of $4,250. The contract provided that the Krobatsches had inspected the home and were fully satisfied with its physical condition. A fire caused damage to the house after the contract was signed by the parties, but the Krobatsches still indicated their readiness to purchase the home. The Krobatsches later visited the home during the evening and were shocked to see hordes of roaches after they turned on the lights. An exterminator informed the Krobatsches that the roaches rendered the house unfit for human habitation and it would require a twenty-one-day treatment to eliminate the infestation that would necessitate removing the carpet. The Krobatsches rescinded their contract for the purchase of the home. Weintraub rejected the rescission and sued the Krobatsches.
- 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.