HOW TO BRIEF A CASE Below I have sketched in the beginnings of a brief as a format. This time-honored method of analysis is the basic unit of law school instruction and so most judicial opinions are written to conform to this approach. Knowing the rules makes watching the game so much more interesting. Start with the name of the Case which is called the “style” of the case. PERLA GRAFF v. JAY L. GRAFF‚ 569 So. 2d 811‚ Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App. (1990). First is the case name‚ followed by the citation
Premium Marriage Law Appeal
Kathryn Myrick Business Law 1 Professor McDonnell Case Brief A.5 Braun v. Soldier of Fortune Magazine Inc.‚ 968 F. 2d 1110 (11th Cir. 1992) FACTS: In 1985 Michael Savage placed an ad in the Soldier of Fortune Magazine (“SOF”) advertising “Gun For Hire”. The ad ran from June 1985 to March 1986 generating an average of 30-40 call per week for jobs ranging from murder‚ kidnapping‚ assault and other criminal activity. After three previous failed attempts on his business partner Richard Braun’s
Premium Law
Research Journal of Finance and Accounting ISSN 2222-1697 (Paper) ISSN 2222-2847 (Online) Vol.4‚ No.6‚ 2013 www.iiste.org Audit Practice in Global Perspective: Present And Future Challenges AbdulFattah AbdulGaniyy Department of Accountancy‚ The Federal Polytechnic‚ Kaura Namoda‚ Nigeria. * E-mail of the corresponding author:abuaishah1425@yahoo.com Abstract This paper discusses the history of audit and its development particularly Enron and Worldcom scandals as some of the audit failures that increased
Premium Audit Financial audit Auditor's report
Learning Team B Reflection: Week 3 IRAC Brief Learning Team B: Rhea Carson‚ Elspeth Flynn‚ Matthew Cable‚ Dusty Henson‚ Joseph Spurling LAW531 October 21‚ 2014 Janice Scott IRAC: Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons Case Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons Issue Whether first-sale doctrine codified in 17 U.S.C. § 109(a) is applicable to John Wiley & Sons copyrighted works manufactured and bought abroad‚ resold in the United States by Kirtsaeng without the owner’s permission. Is this a violation of the Copyright
Premium Copyright
Marriot Case Brief 1. What is the weighted Average Cost of Capital for Marriot Corporation? WACC for Marriott Corp is 11.89 WACC of divisions: Lodging 10.29‚ Restaurant 13.49‚ Contract Services 13.615 a) What risk-free rate and the risk premium did you use to calculate the cost of equity? We used 8.95% as the risk free rate (LT Government Debt) and the MRP we used was 7.43%‚ which means are expected market return is 8.95+7.43=16.38% b) How did you measure Marriott’s cost of debt? We added
Free Arithmetic mean Average Weighted average cost of capital
Chaiken Case Brief Facts: Chaiken made separate but equal agreements with Strazella and Spitzer to operate a barber shop. Under the “partnership” agreement: ~ Chaiken would provide the barber chairs‚ supplies and licenses. Strazella and Spitzer provide tools of the trade. ~ Gross returns were to be divided on a percentage basis between all three men. ~ Chaiken will decide all matters of the partnership policy. ~Stated hours of work and holidays. ~Chaiken holds and distributes all receipts
Premium Employment Corporation Profit
Case Brief A.4 GNAZZO v. G.D. SEARLE & CO. 973 F.2d 136 (1992) U.S. Court of Appeals‚ Second Circuit Pierce‚ Circuit Judge Facts: On November 11‚ 1974‚ Gnazzo had an intrauterine device (IUD) inserted in her uterus for contraceptive purposes. The IUD was developed‚ marketed and sold by G.D. Searle & Co. (Searle). When Gnazzo’s deposition was taken‚ she stated that her doctor had informed her that “the insertion would hurt‚ but not for long‚” and that she “would have uncomfortable and probably
Premium Civil procedure Causality Complaint
Get the facts Step 1: The facts of a case suggest an Issue. What facts and circumstances brought these parties to court? Are there buzzwords in the facts that suggest an issue? Is the court deciding a question of fact - i.e. the parties are in dispute over what happened - or is it a question of law - i.e. the court is unsure which rule to apply to these facts? What are the non-issues? Identify the rule The legal issue would not exist unless some event occurred. The issue mechanically determines
Premium Law Jury Common law
Page 517 918 F.2d 517 54 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. 870‚ 55 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 40‚455‚ 59 USLW 2378 Emma S. VAUGHN‚ Plaintiff-Appellant‚ v. Robert EDEL‚ et al.‚ Defendants‚ Texaco‚ Inc.‚ Defendant-Appellee. No. 90-3181 Summary Calendar. United States Court of Appeals‚ Fifth Circuit. Dec. 6‚ 1990. Page 518 Kenneth J. Beck‚ Harvey‚ La.‚ for plaintiff-appellant. Albert H. Hanemann‚ Jr.‚ Lemle & Kelleher‚ John D. Fitzmorris‚ Jr.‚ Legal Dept. New Orleans‚ La.‚ for Texaco
Premium Discrimination Racism
WILFREDO M. CATU‚ complainant vs. ATTY. VICENTE G. RELLOSA‚ respondent A.C. No. 5738 (February 19‚ 2008) This is an administrative case filed by the complainant claiming that the respondent committed an act of impropriety as a lawyer and as public officer when he stood as counsel for the defendants despite the fact that he presided over the conciliation proceedings between the litigants as punong barangay.. Facts: Complainant Wilfredo M. Catu is a co-owner of a lot and the building erected thereon
Premium Lawyer Law