Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Essay Available:
Pages:
8 pages/≈2200 words
Sources:
1 Source
Style:
Other
Subject:
Law
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 34.56
Topic:

Introduction to Law Case Briefs

Essay Instructions:

Intro to Law Case Briefs Assignment
Students must write and submit a case brief to the school for each case listed below. Any cases not covered in the casebook may be located in books at a local law library or online at LexisNexis. If a student can’t find a required case, a different case on the same topic from the casebook may be used for preparation of a written case brief.
Note that students are required to read the cases in their casebook, then write their own briefs. Submitting an already-written brief from Wikepedia, Casenote Legal Briefs books, online sites, such as casenotes.com, quimbee, lawnix, etc., or even from LexisNexis, is not allowed. Presenting such briefs as if they are one’s own is plagiarism, and will result in a grade of “Fail.” Again, students must read the actual cases, then write their own briefs.
The case briefs are graded as “Pass” or “Fail” only. The most common reason students fail the case briefs assignment is plagiarism. Therefore, students should take care to use quotation marks when quoting from the original case decision, and they should use their own words for all other parts of the briefs.
Students who need help in learning to write a case brief should read the article, Why and How to Write a Case Brief.
Students must submit all case briefs together, so students must complete the assignment for each course in which they are enrolled for the term, then submit them all at once. We recommend completing the case briefs for all courses and submitting them during the 5th to 7th month of study. The cases for this course can be found on LexisNexis.
All the case briefs for the course must be in one document, with each separate case brief starting on a new page of the document. That is, students submit one document for Intro to Law Case Briefs; they do not submit eight separate documents with one case brief on each.
Note that in order to be eligible to request final exams, students must have submitted case briefs, and must receive a grade of “Pass.”
Submission instructions and format requirements are in Chapter 5 of this syllabus. When students complete and pass the torts case briefs assignment, they receive credit for eight hours of verified academic engagement.
Why and How to Brief a Case, including a sample case brief of Lucy v. Zehmer
Click here for submission instructions and format requirements.
List of Required Cases for the Intro to Law Case Briefs Assignment:
Nelson v. Lewis, 344 N.E.2d 268, 36 Ill.App.3d 130 (1976). (Strict Liability)
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803). (Judicial Review)
McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819). (Scope of Legislative Power)
Curtis v. Loether, 415 U.S. 189, 94 S. Ct. 1005 (1974). (Right to Jury Trial)
Smith v. United States, 508 U.S. 223 (1993). (Plain Meaning Rule)
In re Marriage of Buzzanca, 61 Cal.Appp.4th 1410, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 280 (1998). (Legal Realism)
Johnson v. M'Intosh, 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543 (1823). (Property Ownership)
Riggs v. Palmer, 115 N.Y. 506, 22 N.E. 188 (1889). (Legal Positivism)

Essay Sample Content Preview:
Introduction to Law Case Briefs
Nelson v. Lewis
TOPIC: Strict Liability.
CASE: Nelson v. Lewis, 344 N.E.2d 268, 36 Ill.App.3d 130 (1976).
FACTS: The plaintiff, Jo Anne Nelson, a two-and-a-half-year-old girl, was playing in the defendant's backyard with other children, including the defendant's daughter. While playing, the plaintiff accidentally stepped on the defendant's dog's tail. The large Dalmatian, which had been chewing a bone, reacted viciously by scratching the plaintiff's left eye. She suffered permanent damage to the tear duct as a result of the attack. There was no evidence that anyone had teased or aggravated the dog before the incident. Further, there was no evidence that the dog had ever attacked anyone.
HISTORY: The plaintiff filed a suit seeking damages, which the circuit court dismissed. She appealed on the ground that her unintentional act did not amount to provocation.
ISSUE: Can the plaintiff’s unintentional act constitute provocation.
RULING: Yes. The statute upon which the plaintiff based her arguments did not distinguish between intentional and unintentional provocation. Therefore, the appellate court affirmed the verdict delivered by the circuit court.
RATIONALE: The court contended that within the plain meaning of the “dog-bite” statute, unintentional provocation would appear to constitute provocation. The court, in this regard, concluded that the defendant’s claim that an unintentional act constituted provocation was consistent with the statute. The court also factored in the fact that the dog was of quiet temperament and disposition. It did not have a history of having attacked anybody else before the incident.
RULE: The judges relied on the “dog-bite” statute that in part states that the owner of a dog or any other animal can only be liable for damages if the animal attacks someone without provocation. In this case, it was determined that the dog had been provoked.
Marbury v. Madison
TOPIC: Judicial Review.
CASE: Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 2 L.Ed. 60 (1803).
FACTS: In January 1801, after President John Adams lost his re-election bid, he nominated his close advisor, John Marshall, to fill the seat of Chief Justice. Even though Marshall did not have prior experience as a judge, his nomination was overwhelmingly approved by the U.S. senate. After that, President Adams embarked on filling many other judiciary positions with his supporters before his exit. He nominated 42 men as judges of peace but did not manage to deliver the commissions of four of them in good time. Among the four was William Marbury who was a Virginia politician. After Jefferson took office, he ordered his secretary of state, James Madison, to withhold the four undelivered commissions. This prompted Marbury to file a suit to get his job. However, instead of going to the circuit court, he opted for the Supreme Court.
ISSUE: Did Marbury and the other four appointees have a right to their commissions?
Did the Supreme Court have a remedy to the problem?
RULING: Under the leadership of Marshall, the court found that the rights of the plaintiff had been violated. However, the court that it had no jurisdiction in such a case as it could only act as an appeals co...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:
Order

👀 Other Visitors are Viewing These Other Essay Samples: