How to Brief a Case
"Briefing" a case is a technique used by law students and others who study court opinion to boil an opinion down to its essential elements. The purpose of having you brief a case is to see how well you understand legal reasoning and the law and how well you can summarize the important elements of a court opinion accurately.
A case brief should, generally, be no more than one typed, single-spaced page, In a case brief, you want to be sure to include these elements:
? The name of the case and its citation at the top (include the LEXIS citations).
? Facts of the case. The first section of the court opinion will discuss the background of what happened that resulted in the litigation decided by this case. You should summarize that background in two or three sentences.
? Proceedings below. The same section of the court opinion that deals with the facts of the case also will probably discuss how lower courts decided the case. Summarize in one or two sentences.
? Questions before the court. Shortly after it discusses the facts of the case and the proceedings below, the court often will discuss what question(s) is/are before it. In other words, the court will state issues upon which the appeal is being brought to it. Often this part will be introduced with a phrase such as "The question before this court is ..."
? Holding. How did the court answer that question/those questions? Sometimes this will be immediately apparent; in other opinions, you will have to read most of the decision to get to the holding. Courts often signal that this is the part you need to pay attention to by saying "We find that ..." or "We hold that ..." There can be more than one holding.
? Reasoning. This is often the toughest part to figure out. Opinions will sometimes go on forever about why a case had to be decided a certain way. Ignore the hypothetical arguments and the arguments that they reject and summarize in a couple of sentences why the court says it favored one argument over another.
? Important concurrence (if any). If one or more justices write a concurring opinion and it seems to say something important (for example, says the majority opinion is limited to just the facts of this case), include a brief summary of that opinion.
? Dissenting opinion(s). Likewise, if there is a dissenting opinion that seems to take an important departure from the majority, include a summary of it. Don't bother if the dissent is merely over a procedural matter ("We shouldn't have taken this case because of Rule 499X," for example). Court decisions are usually written in fairly plain English, and I have tried to avoid cases that are highly technical (that turn, for example, on whether a particular rule required a 350 megahertz signal or a 500 megahertz signal). However, you may be baffled a bit by some Latin phrases that are interspersed in the opinions. Also, the decisions frequently have what are called "string cites," where the justice writing the opinion will say "As we've said before, " and then list three, six, or a dozen cases in which the court has said something. For the most part, you can ignore both the Latin and the string cites. If a Latin word or phrase seems important, you can probably find it in a regular dictionary or better yet, in a Law Dictionary. Also, some legal databases provide a link to an online legal dictionary. You can, of course, always ask a class mate for help.
Case, 1
Title: Roy Vs Melissa
The Facts of the case: The parties involved in this case include Melissa, Roy and Jake. Melissa is the owner of the copyright covering the sale and distribution of dolls. Roy is the initial client that Melissa intends to sell the copyright to but they do not sign an agreement with Melissa to imply that he has purchased the copyright. On the other hand, Jake is also an interested party in buying Melissa's patent and convinces her to sign a formal agreement granting him the exclusive rights. The three parties' dispute over who is the right owner of the copyright.
Proceedings Below: The lower courts may have incorporated the fact that Jake acquired the copyright maliciously and so ruled in favor of Roy. Conversely, Roy will lose his rights over the patent since there are no legal statements confirming that he received the copyright from Melissa.
The Question before the court: The question before the court is whether the law permits copyright transfers without any legally binding agreement. In this case, the specific legal question is what the law considers as the legal procedure for the reassignment of copyrights. Therefore, Roy must understand that a convention does not exist simply because there is a concurrence between him and Melissa. Additionally, such a contract for the sale of copyright must have a requirement of writing and must be signed by both parties for it to be legally binding. Conversely, it is important to realize that in the situation of Melissa and Roy, there was an element of offer and acceptance.
Holding: The rule that applies to the issues in this case is the components of a valid contract. As such, a legitimate agreement must be signed and at least must be witnessed by a third party in order to be legally binding.
Reasoning: The law requires that people analyze the contents and the obligations that makes the transfer of ownership lawful before getting into a contract. As such, it was Roy's duty to ensure that he gets to sign an agreement showing that the copyright has legally been transferred to him. Further, entering into a contract by a word of mouth presents loop holes for the provider of the proposal to practice deception.
Concurrence: From the foregoing, Roy loses the copyright title to Jake. Consequently, Roy must understand the legal issues that entail the transfer of copyrights and the shift of ownership. Due to his ignorance, the case is ruled in favor of Jake.
Dissents; The Supreme Court conceded the fact that an agreement created by a word of mouth is insufficient to give enough proof that an agreement actually exists ( Sales, 2001).