CASE BRIEF FORMAT A case brief is the result of distilling a court opinion down into its essential elements. There are many different ways to brief a case‚ each dependent largely upon its purpose in being assigned. Below is the format which you should follow for briefing cases in this course: CASE BRIEF TO: Supervising Attorney’s Name‚ Esq. FROM: (last four digits of your social security number) DATE: (the date the brief is due) CITATION: (You should give a complete citation
Premium Appeal Question Law
Helen Palsgraf‚ Respondent‚ v. The Long Island Railroad Company‚ Appellant [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] Court of Appeals of New York 248 N.Y. 339; 162 N.E. 99; 1928 N.Y. LEXIS 1269; 59 A.L.R. 1253 February 24‚ 1928‚ Argued May 29‚ 1928‚ Decided Facts: The plaintiff Helen Palsgraf was standing at the platform station of Long Island Railroad Company after buying her ticket and waiting for her train. Suddenly‚ a man carrying a package rushed to catch another train that was moving away from the platform
Premium Law
Legal Brief: Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders Facts: • Pennsylvania State Police hired Nancy Drew Suders as a police communications operator. • Suder’s supervisors were Sergeant Eric D. Easton‚ Patrol Corporal William D. Baker‚ and Corporal Eric B. Prendergast. • Suders was subject to sexual harassment from all three of her supervisors during the term of her employment. • Easton would mention the subject of people having sex with animals each time Suders entered the office. • Easton told
Premium Employment Termination of employment Supreme Court of the United States
Coaching: A Case Study on the Potential of ‘Brief Coaching’ PHONE EMAIL WEB Hector Sandoval +34 664 46 10 54 hsandoval@me.com www.hsctalent.com A Case Study: The Potential of Brief Coaching Leadership Coaching: A Case Study on the Potential of ‘Brief Coaching’
Premium Leadership
name) Roe v. Wade On writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court Oral Argument: 12/19/2012 Name Attorney for Wade Jane Roe‚ a pregnant single mother‚ who wished to have an abortion in the State of Texas‚ sued on behalf of all mothers seeking abortions to prevent the enforcement of the Texas abortion ban. The appellant has challenged the Texas statue‚ claiming it violates the 1st‚ 5th‚ 9th and 14th amendment’s implied right to privacy which was established in Griswold v. Connecticut
Premium Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Roe v. Wade Supreme Court of the United States
liberty‚ or property without due process of law (p. 23).” In the case of Gunasekera v. Irwin Gunasekera was correct that his due process rights had be violated. According to an exert written up be Cornell University Gunasekera was denied property because he had tenure with the University (para. 13). Because the decision to prohibit him from advising students deprived him of property Gunasekera should have been granted due process. In this case‚ Gunasekera should have been given an adequate chance to clear
Premium United States Constitution Law Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
1. Gideon is afraid to go to Charleston because he is a “nigger”. He feels as though he is illiterate and not very smart he would not fit in. He would not want to go “to city full of white houses… full of white folks making fun…” (p. 16-17). To help him overcome that fear Brother Peter tells him they “need a leader” (p 17). Because of how strong Gideon is physically and mentally he was chosen to represent them. 2. To Brother Peter Gideon is a young man. Since he is a younger man he can learn
Premium Christianity English-language films New Testament
390 Ga. 638 SOUTH EASTERN REPORTER‚ 2d SERIES 282 Ga.App. 229 BECKS v. PIERCE. tained in automobile accident with intoxicated bar patron in the absence of evidence that bar owner knew that patron was going to drive home. West’s Ga.Code Ann. § 51–1– 40(b). No. A06A1149. Court of Appeals of Georgia. Nov. 2‚ 2006. Certiorari Denied Feb. 5‚ 2007. Background: Motorist brought action against bar owner under Dram Shop Act for injuries she sustained in automobile accident with
Premium Jury United States Appeal
Liebmann V. Canada (Minister of National Defense) Facts: Liebmann applied for the position of Executive Assistant to the Commanding Officer in the Persian Gulf Operation. Staff Officers recommended he be appointed and the Commanding Officer agreed. When command staff became aware that Liebmann was Jewish they decided not to select him. Liebmann challenged the decision‚ as well as CFAO 20-53 (an enactment for which the decision was based upon) under s. 15 of the Charter. Issues: 1
Premium Contract
Date/Court: The United States Supreme Court‚ 1998 Facts: This case deals with the defendant Patrick Knowles; who was stopped in Newton‚ Iowa for driving 20 miles over the speed limit. The police officer at the time pulled Knowles over and issued him a ticket‚ but under the Iowa Code the officer could have arrested the individual. After writing Knowles a ticket the officer searched the vehicle‚ where under the driver’s seat he found a pipe that could be used to smoke Marijuana and a small bag of
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States Constitution Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution