CASE BRIEFING, Summaries of Law

Download CASE BRIEFING and more Summaries Law in PDF only on Docsity! Case Briefing 1 of 3 Handouts on Case Briefing CASE BRIEFING You’ve probably heard lawyers on television or in the movies talk about filing briefs with the court. But law school case briefing is something altogether different. To brief a case is to reduce the case to its bare essentials--to analyze the facts and the law that the court applied in a procedural context, and to explain the reasons for its decision. Briefing forces you to read the case thoroughly so that you can state the essentials in your own words. Briefing also gives you a condensed version of the case that you can understand and use later to make your outline and to study. Some students chose to use “book briefing” or “Technicolor briefing.” These two shortcut methods involve making notes in the margins of your book or highlighting different parts of a case in different colors. THESE TECHNIQUES ARE NOT ADEQUATE SUBSTITUTES FOR CASE BRIEFS WRITTEN IN YOUR OWN WORDS. If you don’t put the case into your own words, it is unlikely you will absorb the information you need to respond properly if called on in class and to provide sufficient answers on law school exams. Each professor has his or her own preferences for brief writing, because the basic form has many variants. Follow the first rule on case briefing—for each class, prepare briefs the way that professor prefers. If the professor expresses no preference, use the basic form described below, with these nine sections: 1. Case name and citation, 2. Facts (the story of what happened condensed to what you think the court found relevant to this judicial decision), 3. Procedural Posture (what happened when the case was brought to trial and subsequently appealed), 4. Issue (the question that the appellate court must answer in this case), version of Black’s Law Dictionary handy when you’re briefing is always a good idea. If you don’t understand the words you’re reading, you’ll never figure out what the court was doing.) Is the case before the court on a motion or exception, such as a motion for summary judgment? Was the case tried on the merits? Was the trial by a judge or jury? Did the losing party move for a new trial? In a criminal case, always include the crime the defendant was charged with or convicted of, what appeals were taken, and what disposition was made by an intermediate appellate court. In a civil case you would include the basis for the plaintiff's lawsuit and the outcome in the trial court. In both you would also include the trial court's action or failure to act that is the basis for the appeal. THE ISSUE: The issue is the question or questions the court is deciding. Sometimes the court will make it easy for you and say, "The issue we decide is . . ." or something equivalent. Often it will not. Even when the court tells you the issue, you have to check to see if the court is right. The court may, in fact, discuss several issues, or you may conclude that the issue the court actually decides is different from the one it says it's deciding. Sometimes determining the issue requires a great deal of thought. Think of the issue as a legal question that relates to the facts of the case. Your statement of the issue should explain the question in one sentence that a person who hasn’t read the case can understand. If you're having trouble stating the issue, ask yourself this question: "What does the appellant say the trial court did wrong?" A basic rule about appellate courts is that they do not retry cases. Instead, they correct errors. This means the appealing party must claim the trial court did something it should not have done or failed to do something it should have done. The substantive issue is likely to be bound up with the trial court's error. If you find the issue is too general--appellant argues the evidence was insufficient to convict, or appellant challenges the instructions--then ask, "What grounds does the appellant have for arguing, or the court for deciding, that the evidence was or wasn't sufficient, or that the instructions were or were not valid? What element of the offense did the government fail to prove? What was improperly left out of or improperly added to the jury instructions?" RULE APPLIED: A rule, sometimes called the black letter law, is a general statement of law that prescribes, prohibits, or permits general conduct. Louisiana courts will generally first examine the statutory law (revised statutes and codes) and then Louisiana case law. In federal cases and cases from other states, the courts look to statutes and common-law rules formed by synthesis of several cases on the same issue. Not all the elements of the rule may be at issue in any one case. HOLDING: A holding is a decision based upon an application of the chosen rule to the key facts of the case. It is the answer the court gives in response to the issue. Sometimes it is as hard to find the holding as it is to find the issue. When having trouble spotting the holding, ask yourself what the court minimally had to decide to come out the way it did. Another way to discover the holding is to rephrase the issue question as a statement. REASONING: In some opinions, the court will clearly state the reasons for its decision. In others, the court won’t be so generous. But your common sense should tell you that there is a reason for every rule. Once you’ve read the opinion and understand why the court did what it did, you have to decide what part of the reasons to leave out. Try summarizing each paragraph in one sentence. Then look at those sentences and figure out which steps aren’t necessary in understanding what the court did. RESULT: A good brief should make clear the outcome of the case. Did the appellate court send the case back for a new trial? Did it affirm the dismissal of the case? Who won or lost? This information is vital to understanding the case. CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINIONS: A concurring opinion is a separate opinion given by a judge who did not vote with the majority. In a concurrence, the judge agrees with the court’s ultimate decision but for different reasons. In a dissenting opinion, a judge disagrees with the procedural result reached by the majority of the court. These opinions are important because the judicial system is always changing. A statement that is made in a concurring or dissenting opinion today may become the law of the land tomorrow.