case brief
Hello, students. This lecture will focus on case briefing. You will begin to brief a case this week.
Many students ask, “Why do we brief cases?” This is a valid question, and one worth pondering.
Legal professionals brief cases so their reading time is spent in the most productive manner
possible. By briefing a case, we engage in active reading strategies to improve our
understanding of complex legal decisions. Case briefs also serve as useful tools when going back
to a case that we read weeks or months ago in order to use that case as part of a case filing.
As your textbook explains on page 13: “Briefing court opinions serves two purposes. First, and
most important, it makes you read the case thoroughly. You have to go back and dig out the
essentials, organize them, and state them in your own words. This is necessary for an adequate
understanding of the court opinion. Second, it is a form of note taking that provides a
condensed record of the most important information about the case you briefed. You can use
these case briefs to refresh your memory when preparing for class or studying for exams.”
Case briefs are completed using a very specific template. While law firms and legal
professionals many follow slightly different formats for their case briefs, the variations are
generally minor. Once you learn one format, you will be positioned for success with any format
you are asked to use.
In this class, we will follow the briefing format explained on pages 13-16 of your eText. The
sections of your case brief are as follows: citation, facts, rule, issue, holding, reasoning, and
criticism.
The citation goes at the top of the case brief, and is written all on one line. You should include
the name of the case, the court that decided it, where the reader can locate it, and the year of
decision.
The Facts section is divided into two parts: substantive facts and procedural facts. Substantive
facts are the facts of the case that happened before the case came to court. You’ll need to be
selective here, and only include facts that you think affected the court's decision. Procedural
facts are which lower courts heard this case, and how each court decided.
The rule should be the rule of law on which the court based its decision. This should be based
on a previous case, a statute, a rule, or a section of the state of federal Constitution.
The next section is the Issue. As explained in your eText on page 14, “an issue is the legal
question created by the facts and relevant rule that the court must resolve.” Your Issue should
start with the word “Whether” and include references to the facts and law so the reader can
understand why the parties are in court. This is probably the toughest part of the case brief, so
take your time, be patient with yourself, and revise, revise, revise!
The Holding is the answer to the question asked in the Issue. It should start with Yes or No, and
should contain very similar language to the issue question. Your eText explains on page 14, “To
be useful, a holding should be broad enough to help courts resolve similar cases, but not so
broad as to stand for no more than a general legal principle. Learning how to state a holding
either very narrowly, by including very specific facts, or very broadly, by stating the facts as
generalizations only, is a skill you will acquire over time. It is best to start with a narrow holding
because you will find it easier to amend a narrow holding to make it broader than you will to
amend a broad holding to make it narrower. However, even with a narrow holding, include only
those facts that you think truly affected the court’s decision.”
The reasoning section should be written in your own words. Here, you should explain the
court’s holding clearly and succinctly.
The last section is the criticism section. This should include a short accounting of what the
dissent or concurrence had to say. Be sure to include the judge or justice’s name who authored
the dissent to concurrence. This section should also include your own opinion of the decision.
Your criticism section should also point out any logical failings or limitations that you found in
the majority opinion's thinking. Make sure anyone reading your criticism section can tell when
you are giving your own criticism versus when you are simply reporting on what the dissent had
to say. Consider using headings or subheadings within this section to cue your reader.
You should follow this format for case brief #1 and case brief #2. Be sure to integrate my
feedback on each assigned part of the Case Brief #1 before you submit the final Case Brief #1 in
week 5.
Good luck!