Unit Two Powerpoint Case Analysis Case Briefs

The Legal System, Research & Writing I : 

The Legal System, Research & Writing I Summer 2010 Monday, June 7

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

2 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS Issue Holding Rule Facts Reason and Policies How does the law apply The result The law What happened? Justification for the result

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

3 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS HOLDING The decision in the case The answer to the legal question ** Helpful hint: To determine the holding, ask yourself what did the Court decide or conclude?

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

4 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS EXPRESS HOLDING Express holdings are announced: “We hold that driving a car at ninety miles per hour is prima facie reckless driving.

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

5 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS IMPLIED HOLDING The Court gives you its decision and the reasons supporting it, but does not tell you what rule it has formulated: “The trial court found the defendant guilty of reckless driving without any testimony that the defendant was, in fact, operating his car in a reckless manner. Anyone who drives at ninety miles per hour is forced to dodge and weave through traffic at a high rate of speed. This conduct is inherently reckless and endangers the well-being of others. Affirmed.”

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

6 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS HOLDING State v. Klein (1979) p. 23 What is Answer “C” the actual holding?

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

7 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS ISSUE The legal question that must be resolved before a case can be decided (sometimes stated expressly or impliedly). Expressly, e.g., “The question presented in this case is whether a snowmobile is a motor vehicle within the meaning of Michigan Motor Vehicle Code.”

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

8 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS ISSUE Johnson v. Silk (1980) p. 24 Why is Answer “C” the correct statement of the issue?

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

9 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS RULE The general legal principle relevant to the particular factual situation presented. Courts usually state what rule they are applying and what rule they will chose not to apply.

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

10 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS THE FACTS There are two types of facts: 1) Legally relevant facts 2) Procedurally relevant facts

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

11 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS THE FACTS Legally relevant facts are what the court considers important in deciding the case. e.g., facts that relate to when something did or did not happen.

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

12 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS THE FACTS Procedurally relevant facts describe at what stage in the case an error may have occurred in the lower court. ** These facts are typically stated in an appellate opinion. They describe the specific question that an appellate court will address.

CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS : 

13 CASE ANALYSIS & CASE BRIEFS REASONS & POLICIES Reasons are the steps in logical process the court uses in arriving at its holding. A simple explanation of how a legal rule or policy applies or does not apply to the case. ** Try to understand “why” the court arrived at its decision. What reasoning process did the court employ?

PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS : 

14 PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS Judges are free to modify legal rules in accordance with social norms and their views of justice and common sense. ** Consider the debate over judicial activism and the political fight over the appointment of judges.

PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS : 

15 PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS Precedent and Stare Decisis serve as important checks on a judge’s freedom to ensure that the law develops in an orderly manner.

PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS : 

16 PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS PRECEDENT: Courts look to previous decisions on similar questions. The usefulness of those decisions is premised on the idea that once an issue is properly decided, it should not be decided again. ** Reliance on precedent ensures equal justice for similar cases. This encourages confidence in the system.

PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS : 

17 PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS STARE DECISIS: requires that a court follow its own decisions and the decisions of higher courts within the same jurisdiction. e.g., State trial court must follow the decisions of the state’s appellate courts.

PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS : 

18 PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS Binding precedent: When a doctrine of stare decisis applies, a court must reconcile the result in a given case with past decisions. Only after explaining why previous decisions don’t apply, may a court fashion new rules or modify or expand existing rules. Persuasive precedent: Applies only when the doctrine of stare decisis does not apply. Courts are not bound to follow the precedent of another jurisdiction or equal courts of the same jurisdiction.

PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS : 

19 PRECEDENT & STARE DECISIS Dicta (said in passing): Statements by a court that do not bear on the issues before it. ** Dicta has little precedential value because a court is required to decide only the issues before it, not the hypothetical ones. Dicta indicates how a court may rule in the future given the particular set of facts.