Business Law
CRAIG SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
Department of Finance and Business Law
BA 18 - Business and the Legal Environment
Professor Michael T. Yonker
THIRD WRITING ASSIGNMENT (CASE BRIEF)
In Module 2, we discussed torts. We will now build on that topic in the context of agency in our
current module.
Accompanying this memorandum is Helen Palsgraf v. The Long Island Rail Road Company, an
important case in tort law.
For this writing assignment, each student should submit a brief of the Palsgraf case, following
the model below.
The brief is due on November 25, by 11:59 pm. It must be submitted via TurnItIn on Canvas. It
is worth 25 points depending on quality and analysis. There is no page recommendation for this
assignment. However, I expect that all sections in the model below will be answered completely
but succinctly. It must be double space, with twelve-point Times New Roman font.
MODEL
Facts
Explain the circumstances which brought the parties to court. Include only the facts relevant to
this issue. State the significant facts necessary to present an adequate explanation without
introducing information that is not pertinent or that might confuse the reader.
Issue
State the issue presented to the court in one sentence. If possible, state the question in a for that
could be answered “yes” or “no.”
Holding
State how the court decided the issue by answering the question “yes” or “no”, or some other
appropriate response to the question. You may add explanation if you wish, but it is not
necessary.
Reasoning
In your own words, explain how the court came to the conclusion that it did. You may quote
from the decision, but the analysis should be your own. If you quote from the decision, indicate
the page from which the quote is taken. Note that no new facts should be introduced in this
section. All facts used by the court to reach its decision should be stated in the “facts” section.
Summary of Dissenting Opinion
A dissenting opinion is written by judges on an appellate panel who do not agree with the
decision of the majority of the judges on the panel. Not all cases include dissenting opinions.
Palsgraf, however, does. In your own words, explain how the dissent disagrees with the
majority, and what rule the dissenting judges would have made.