Students should observe a very specific format when briefing a case for class.

In one sense, the fact that the Rossum text already offers a short brief (the italicized text preceding the case excerpt) for each case is an advantage, at least insofar as it offers a place to begin by identifying some of the core issues a brief must address.

A brief should be between 300-600 words. For our purposes, your brief should summarize in separate paragraphs:

• the parties allege?)

• the core constitutional issue(s)

• the ruling of the Court

• the majority opinion

• the concurring opinion(s), if any

• the dissenting opinion(s), if any

Your written brief must be submitted in class on the date indicated by the syllabus.

In most cases, if you are approaching the case briefs properly, the biggest problem you should encounter will be how to keep your brief to only 600 words, as opposed to reaching 300 words.

Be certain that your brief summarizes succinctly all of the information a person would need to understand the case, which is the purpose of a brief. Be certain to observe the format found in the style sheet.

The oral presentation of your brief in class need be nothing more than reading the brief aloud. Be prepared to answer questions, both from the instructor and from your classmates.

Briefs should be a one-page summary of the case. Structure the summary according to the

elements listed below. The structure adheres to the types of questions the professor asks in

class and to the information you'll need for outlining. Not every case can be summed up in

one page, but it's a good discipline to attempt to condense the material.

How did this case get to this particular court? Typically, you will be reading case law

from the appeals court. That means the case has already been decided at a lower court and

the losing party has appealed to a higher court. Typically, the lower courts don't write

opinions on their decisions, consequently, you'll almost always be reading appellate

decisions.

The judge often starts the case with information on how the court below decided the case

and which party is making the appeal. Often the cases will present a detailed history of the

arguments presented by both parties in the court below as well.

At minimum, you should be able to answer the following two questions that your

professor is likely to ask in class:

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html (1 of 8)11/14/2006 11:02:38 AM

LawNerds.com: Part 3: Get Smart About the Case Method

Who is appealing on what issues?

What happened in the lower court?

A well-written opinion starts out by telling you the legal issue up-front. Language that the

court uses might include such phrases as:

"The question before us is whether...."

"This case was brought before us to decide whether..."

Appellate courts hear a case on appeal when there has been a problem with the case in the

court below. The problem could be an error that the court made or the appellate court may

want to take the case because the lower courts in its jurisdiction are not consistent in their

decisions. By taking this case, it gives the higher court a chance to give guidance and

establish precedent for the lower courts to follow.

If you're having trouble spotting the issue, then try to key into the word "whether." It often

signals what the turning point for a case.

A well-written case gives the relevant facts that brought the parties to court. In a Torts

case, for instance, the judge recites the facts of the accident or injury. In Contracts, the

prior business relationship might be discussed. In Criminal law, the crime is described.

Case law is at its worst when the court leaves out the facts. Judges sometimes don't

include facts because the question before the appellate court doesn't require all of the

details to be resolved. The issue on appeal is so narrow, that the facts as determined by a

jury are often no longer relevant to the issue at hand. However, it helps when the judges

give you a context by outlining all of the facts.

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html (2 of 8)11/14/2006 11:02:38 AM

LawNerds.com: Part 3: Get Smart About the Case Method

The court should give a clear statement of the rule that controls the issue. The court often

traces the development of the law within its own jurisdiction, starting with the common

law rule. Since many of these bodies of law differ slightly between states, the court prefers

to look within its own jurisdiction before it cites to a case from another state or country.

The judge then either reaffirms a principle of law or fashions a new rule that evolves the

law.

Rules don't stand by themselves without any sort of reason behind them. If there isn't a

sound policy behind a rule, then the court tries to fashion a rule that serves the principles

of equity or justice. Sometimes a statute that does not further the policies of equity or

justice binds the judge. In those circumstances, the judge sometimes upholds the statute

but writes the opinion in such a way to bring the injustice to the attention of the legislature

in order to encourage them to change the law.

Dicta refers to anything that isn't relevant to the case's holding. Often judges will use a

case to expound upon their theories of the law. The theories may not be relevant to the

case at hand, but it gives the judge a chance to give direction to the lower courts by

putting the theory in writing. Dicta does not carry weight as a precedent. But it's useful to

note how the court might have ruled given a different set of circumstances.

This is how and why the court fits the particular facts and circumstances of this case into the

rule. The courts often fashion tests or rely on precedent, which forms part of the reasoning. You

should take special note of the reasoning and try to emulate it in your own writing.

The holding is the court's decision on the issue. Who wins? The holding may be narrowly

construed to a particular issue or be very broad. Identifying the holding may merely

consist of finding the words "We hold that..."

The holding should include the disposition of the case. Is the ruling of the lower court

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html (3 of 8)11/14/2006 11:02:38 AM

LawNerds.com: Part 3: Get Smart About the Case Method

affirmed? Overturned? Remanded for retrial?

A Concurrence is a separate opinion in which one of the judges agrees with the result but

has different reasoning. Like dissents, you will find that concurrences proliferate in

Supreme Court cases. Look at the concurrence to see how the reasoning differs. Make a

note of it in the brief.

Typically, a panel of judges tries appellate cases. Not surprisingly, there is not always

unanimous agreement. Consequently, a judge who is not in the majority will write a

dissent. Dissents are ubiquitous in Supreme Court cases. Make sure that you pick up the

major sticking points in the dissent. What principles does the dissenting judge disagree

with the majority on? Dissents are sometimes indicators of a direction the court may

eventually move towards.

Sample Case

The following is a sample case that is commonly used in Contracts Cases to

illustrate the idea of a "legal duty." Each element is identified.

Supreme Court of New Jersey 91 N.J.L. 462; 103 A. 24

February 2, 1918, Decided

Parties: These are the primary parties. Generally the case will be referred to only by the last

names of the parties. E.g. Gray v. Martino.

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html (4 of 8)11/14/2006 11:02:38 AM

LawNerds.com: Part 3: Get Smart About the Case Method

MINTURN, J. The plaintiff occupied the position of a special police officer, in Atlantic City, and

 incidentally was identified with the work of the prosecutor of the pleas of the county. He

possessed knowledge concerning the theft of certain diamonds and jewelry from the possession

of the defendant, who had advertised a reward for the recovery of the property. In this situation

 he claims to have entered into a verbal contract with defendant, whereby she agreed to pay him

 $500 if he could procure for her the names and addresses of the thieves. As a result of his

 meditation with the police authorities the diamonds and jewelry were recovered, and plaintiff

brought this suit to recover the promised reward.

Facts of the case: What happened that brought these parties to court?

The District Court, sitting without a jury, awarded plaintiff a judgment for the amount of the

 reward, and hence this appeal.

Procedural History: Who won in the court below?

Various points are discussed in the briefs, but to us the dominant and conspicuous inquiry in the

 case is, was the plaintiff, during the period of this transaction, a public officer, charged with the

enforcement of the law?

Legal Issue: What fact or circumstance is at issue that will be the deciding factor in how the

court rules on this case? The testimony makes it manifest that he was a special police officer to

 some extent identified with the work of the prosecutor's office, and that position, upon well-

settled grounds of public policy, required him to assist, at least, in the prosecution of

offenders against the law. The services he rendered, in this instance, must be presumed to have

 been rendered in pursuance of that public duty, and for its performance he was not entitled to

 receive a special quid pro quo.

Reasoning/Analysis: The court applies the facts to see whether they satisfy the elements of the

rule.

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html (5 of 8)11/14/2006 11:02:38 AM

LawNerds.com: Part 3: Get Smart About the Case Method

The cases on the subject are collected in a footnote to Somerset Bank v. Edmund, 10

Am. & Eng. Ann. Cas. 726; 76 Ohio St. Rep. 396, the head-note to which reads:

"Public policy and sound morals alike forbid that a public officer should demand or receive for

 services performed by him in the discharge of official duty any other or further remuneration or

 reward than that prescribed or allowed by law."

This rule of public policy has been relaxed only in those instances where the legislature for

 sufficient public reason has seen fit by statute to extend the stimulus of a reward to the public

 without distinction, as in the case of United States v. Matthews, 173 U.S. 381, where the attorney-

general, under an act for "the detection and prosecution of crimes against the United States,"

 made a public offer of reward sufficiently liberal and generic to comprehend the services of a

 federal deputy marshal. Exceptions of that character upon familiar principles serve to

emphasize the correctness of the rule, as one based upon sound public policy.

Rule of Law: Under what rule of law does this issue fall?

The judgment below for that reason must be reversed.

Holding: What is the conclusion of the court?

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html (6 of 8)11/14/2006 11:02:38 AM

LawNerds.com: Part 3: Get Smart About the Case Method

Gray (cop) v. Martino (crime victim)

Cop sues for reward money.

District court awards money to the cop.

Defendant appeals.

At the time the contract was formed, was the plaintiff acting as a police

officer charged with a legal duty to catch criminals without further reward?

Plaintiff makes a verbal contract with defendant. In return for $500, plaintiff will find

 defendant's stolen jewels.

Plaintiff had knowledge of whereabouts of jewels at contract formation.

Plaintiff is a special police officer and has dealings with prosecutor's office.

Defendant published advertisement for reward.

Plaintiff finds stolen goods and arranges return.

1. A public officer cannot demand or receive remuneration or a reward for carrying out the duty

 of his job as a matter of public policy and morality

2. However, it is not against public policy for a police officer to receive a reward in performance

 of his legal duty if the legislature passes a statute giving the reward to the public at large in

 furtherance of some public policy - such as preventing treason against the US.

Court finds sufficient evidence to characterize this fellow as a public official.

His interaction with the prosecutor's office weighed in as a factor in

http://www.lawnerds.com/guide/briefing.html (7 of 8)11/14/2006 11:02:38 AM

LawNerds.com: Part 3: Get Smart About the Case Method

suggesting he had a legal duty.

Since he is characterized within the rule as a public official, he cannot, as a matter of law, receive

 a reward for the performance of his duties.

Court reverses decision of lower court in favor of the plaintiff since he was characterized as a

 public official.