GBA 335 Case Brief 2 Guidelines and Rubric

How and Why to Brief a Law Case

Prof. Joseph Little, Jr., Saint Leo University

Purpose

The purpose of reading in the practice of law is different from the purpose of reading in many other

disciplines. In law, you read not just to familiarize yourself with someone else’s ideas but to be able to use

the information to answer a question. This requires understanding judicial opinions in depth and being

able to use the information in a number of cases to formulate an answer to a new question. Therefore,

passively reading cases is not sufficient; you must deconstruct the opinion into its component parts and

state those components in your own words and in an easily accessible format. Then the information is at

hand for you to apply to a new set of facts.

Briefing a case requires you to put the material into your own words. To do this, you have to understand it.

Underlining text does not require you to understand it. Moreover, briefing a case reduces the volume of

material so you can find what you need. Underlining does not accomplish this goal either.

Assignment

You will complete a brief on the following case and submit it to Chalk and Wire no later than Sunday

11:59 PM EST/EDT of Module 8:

Jakubowicz v. Dittemore, (W.D. MO.2006)

Submit the Case Brief 2 to Chalk and Wire using the link in the Module 8 folder. Students that do not

submit the assignment to Chalk and Wire will receive a zero. This is a key program assessment; the

results are used to ensure students are meeting program goals. Video and PDF instructions can be found

on the course home page. PDF instructions are also located in the Start Here folder.

Instructions

Every lawyer briefs cases differently. A case brief generally consists of a series of topic headings with the

specific information from the case under each heading. Most case briefs contain similar information but

the headings and their sequence may be different. Some professors have a preferred briefing format. You

are only required to follow the general format as set forth below.

The following is adapted from A Practical Guide to Legal Writing and Legal Method (Dernbach, et al.,

2007).

1. Case name: Include the full citation, including the date of the opinion, for future reference and

citation. An example would be as follows: State v. Holloran, 140 NH 563 (1995). Refer to Bluebook to

determine the correct name for the case.

2. Pincites: Include pinpoint cites (cites to a particular page in the case) throughout the case brief so

you can find material again quickly within a case.

3. Procedural History: What happened to the case before it arrived in this court? If it is an appellate

case, list the decisions made by the lower court(s) and note what decision is being reviewed (e.g.,

jury verdict, summary judgment). You may need to look up procedural phrases with which you are

unfamiliar.

4. Facts: Include only the facts that were relevant to the court’s decision. You are unlikely to know what

these are until you have read the entire opinion. Many cases may include procedural facts that are

relevant to the decision in addition to the facts that happened before litigation.

5. Issue: The particular question the court had to decide in this case. It usually includes specific facts as

well as a legal question. It may be expressed or implied in the decision. Cases may have more than

one issue.

6. Holding/Decision: The legal answer to the issue. If the issue is clearly written, then the holding can

be expressed as “yes” or “no.” (Be careful not to confuse the holding with implicit reasoning. See # 8

below.)

7. Rule: The general legal principle(s) relevant to the particular factual situation presented in the case.

8. Reasoning: The logical steps the court takes to arrive at the holding. It can be straightforward and

obvious, or you may have to extrapolate it from the holding. Some reasoning is based on social

policy, which tells you why the holding is socially desirable. Understanding the reasoning behind a

decision is essential.

Additionally, considering the Saint Leo University core value of integrity, specifically comment on

whether voluntarily agreeing to submit to a non-mandatory drug test constitutes an opportunity to

demonstrate personal integrity or whether asserting the right to refuse to submit to a drug test might

also constitute a demonstration of integrity. Provide rationale for your position.

9. Disposition: A statement of what the court actually did in the case (affirmed, overruled, etc.)

10. Dissent/Concurrence: Although this part of the opinion is not considered law, it may help you better

understand some information about the legal reasoning in the case. Not all cases have a dissent or

concurrence, while some may have more than one.

11. Comments: Include your own responses to the case here. For example, does the reasoning make

sense? Is the holding consistent with other cases you have read? Is the case relevant to the question

you are trying to answer? This is a good place to note connections between the case you are briefing

and other cases you have read.

Sample Case Brief

Remember, most case briefs contain similar information but the headings and their sequence may be

different than what is outlined above. You should include in your brief all elements that you deem

necessary whether or not they are included in the sample below.

Name

Luke Records, Inc. v. Navarro, 960 F.2d 134 (11th Cir. 1992)

Procedural History

Appealed from the trial court decision.

Facts

Luke Records, Inc., a recording label, held a contract with the musical group 2 Live Crew. This group

was well known in the genre of “Rap” music, which has repeatedly been accused of incorporating

“obscene” lyrics into the music. Obscene, in this sense, pertains only to the legal definition of

obscenity, not what any particular person or moral code may deem obscene. Luke Records, Inc. was

a Florida Corporation and Nick Navarro was the sheriff of Broward County at the time. The sheriff

obtained an ex-parte injunction (this means an injunction without both parties being present at the

initial hearing) granting the sheriff an injunction (a court order to “stop” doing a particular act). This

injunction was served on local record stores in an effort to have the music removed from Florida retail

sale. After the local Florida Circuit Court in Broward County issued the injunction, the decision was

appealed to the United States District Court for Southern Florida where the Court ordered the sheriff

to stop enforcing the injunction, but did, in fact, rule that the music was obscene, especially the song

“As Nasty As They Wanna Be.” The sheriff appealed the case to the United States Court of Appeals,

11th Circuit, in Atlanta.

Issue

Is this music obscene under Florida state law and/or federal Constitution?

Holding/Decision

No

Rule

Obscenity must meet three part rule. Based on Supreme Court case Miller v. CA. All three parts must

be met:

(a) whether “the average person, applying contemporary community standards” would find that

the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;

(b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically

defined by the applicable state law; and

(c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

Reasoning

The burden of proof could be clear and convincing or preponderance of the evidence test: however,

at the time the sheriff was granted the music, he offered nothing into evidence except a tape of the

music played before the court. There was no additional evidence presented that showed an average

person applying contemporary community standards would find the song appealing only to a prurient

interest. Further, the sheriff failed to prove part (b) and (c) of the test as well simply because he made

no attempt to enter any other testimony or evidence into consideration before the court. The sheriff

failed to meet his burden, although it is well possible that had he submitted all evidence as required,

he could possibly have met the test.

Comments

Case really determined by the sheriff’s failure of proof. No discussion of nature of music. No

discussion of rule. No proper evidence submitted to the court.

WestLaw

To complete the assignment, you will need to first locate the case in the WestLaw database through the

Saint Leo University Online Library. Follow the steps below and contact the university library directly if you

have any technical difficulty (see the syllabus for contact info). Do not contact the eCollege Help Desk. If

you have access to a local law library, feel free to obtain copies of the assigned cases there instead.

1. Log on to the Saint Leo Portal at http://my.saintleo.edu.

2. Click Library at the top of My Saint Leo Home page.

3. Click Databases under FIND INFO.

4. A new browser window will open. Click WestLaw from the list of databases (you may need to scroll

down). Note: As long as you are logged on to My Saint Leo, you will not need to enter a separate

password for WestLaw. If you are not logged on to the portal, you will be prompted to logon (use your

portal UD and password).

5. Search for the case by entering the case name as your search terms. You can use any of the search

tools available, though the simplest may be “Find a document by title” under Shortcuts. This allows

you to enter the names of the parties in the case. For example, to search for Brown v. Board of

Education, you would type “Brown” in the first text box and “Board of Education” in the second text

box.

6. Click Go after entering the names of the parties.

7. The case documentation will display once the search completes. If the search is unsuccessful, check

that you entered the names of the parties correctly. You are encouraged to print a copy of the case to

better assist you in completing the assignment.