Powers of the National Government in the Federal System * AnalyzeColeman v. Court of Appeals of Maryland XXXXXXXXXXaccordingtothebriefinginstructionsgivenbelow. TitleandCitation Thetitle of...


Powers of the National Government in the Federal System


* AnalyzeColeman v. Court of

Appeals of Maryland (2012) accordingtothebriefinginstructionsgivenbelow.


TitleandCitation


Thetitle of thecaseshowswho is opposingwhom. The name of

thepersonwhoinitiated legal action in thatparticularcourtwillalwaysappearfirst.

Since thelosersoftenappealto a highercourt, this can getconfusing.

Thefirstsection of thisguideshowsyou how toidentifytheplayerswithout a

scorecard.

Thecitationtells how tolocatethereporter of thecase in

theappropriatecasereporter. Ifyouknowonlythetitle of thecase, thecitationto it

can be foundusingthecasedigestcoveringthatcourt, orone of

thecomputer-assisted legal researchtools (WestlaworLEXIS-NEXIS).


Facts of the Case


A goodstudentbriefwillinclude a

summary of thepertinentfactsand legal pointsraised in thecase.

Itwillshowthenature of thelitigation, whosuedwhom, based on whatoccurrences,

andwhathappened in thelowercourt/s.

Thefactsareoftenconvenientlysummarized

at thebeginning of thecourt’spublishedopinion. Sometimes, thebeststatement of

thefactswill be found in a dissentingorconcurringopinion. WARNING! Judgesare

not abovebeingselectiveaboutthefactstheyemphasize. This can become of

crucialimportancewhenyoutrytoreconcileapparentlyinconsistentcases,

becausetheway a judgechoosestocharacterizeand “edit”

thefactsoftendetermineswhichway he orshewillvoteand, as a result, whichrule

of lawwill be applied.

Thefactsection of a

goodstudentbriefwillincludethefollowingelements:



A one-sentencedescription of thenature of thecase,

toserve as an introduction.



A statement of therelevantlaw,

withquotationmarksorunderliningtodraw
attentiontothekeywordsorphrasesthatare in dispute.



A summary of thecomplaint (in a civilcase)

ortheindictment (in a criminalcase)
plusrelevantevidenceandargumentspresented in

courttoexplainwho
didwhattowhomandwhythecasewasthoughttoinvolve

illegal
conduct.



A summary of actionstakenbythelowercourts,

forexample: defendant
convicted;

convictionupheldbyappellatecourt; Supreme Court granted
certiorari.


Issues


Theissuesorquestions of

lawraisedbythefactspeculiartothecaseareoftenstatedexplicitlybythecourt.

Again,

watchoutfortheoccasionaljudgewhomisstatesthequestionsraisedbythelowercourt’sopinion,

bytheparties on appeal, orbythenature of thecase.

Constitutionalcasesfrequentlyinvolvemultipleissues,

some of interestonlytolitigantsandlawyers, others of

broaderandenduringsignificanttocitizensandofficialsalike. Be sure

youhaveincludedboth.

Withrareexceptions, theoutcome

of an appellatecasewillturn on themeaning of a provision of theConstitution,

a law, or a judicialdoctrine. Capturethatprovisionordebatedpoint in

yourrestatement of theissue. Set it offwithquotationmarksorunderline it.

Thiswillhelpyoulaterwhenyoutrytoreconcileconflictingcases.

Whennotingissues, it

mayhelptophrasethem in terms of questionsthat can be answeredwith a precise

“yes” or “no.”

Forexample, thefamouscase of Brown

v. Board of Educationinvolvedtheapplicability of a provision of the 14th

Amendmenttothe U.S. Constitutionto a schoolboard’spractice of

excludingblackpupilsfromcertainpublicschoolssolelyduetotheirrace.

Theprecisewording of theAmendment is “nostateshall…

denytoanypersonwithinitsjurisdictiontheequalprotection of thelaws.”

Thecarefulstudentwouldbeginbyidentifyingthekeyphrasesfromthisamendmentanddecidingwhich

of themwerereally at issue in thiscase.

Assumingthattherewasnodoubtthattheschool board wasacting as theState,

andthatMiss Brown was a “personwithinitsjurisdiction,” thenthekeyissuewould

be “Doestheexclusion of studentsfrom a publicschoolsolely on thebasis of

raceamountto a denial of ‘equalprotection of thelaws’?”

Of coursetheimplications of

thiscasewent far beyondthesituation of Miss Brown, theTopeka School Board,

orevenpubliceducation. Theycastdoubt on thecontinuingvalidity of

priordecisions in whichtheSupreme Court had heldthatrestriction of Black

Americansto “separate but equal” facilitiesdid not denythem “equalprotection

of thelaws.” Makenote of anysuchimplications in yourstatement of issues at

theend of thebrief, in whichyou set outyourobservationsandcomments.

NOTE:

Morestudentsmisreadcasesbecausethey fail toseetheissues in terms of

theapplicablelaworjudicialdoctrinethanforanyotherreason. There is

nosubstitutefortakingthe time toframecarefullythequestions, sothattheyactuallyincorporatethekeyprovisions

of thelaw in termscapable of beinggivenpreciseanswers.

Itmayalsohelptolabeltheissues, forexample, “proceduralissues,”

“substantiveissues,” “legal issue,” andso on. Remembertoo, thatthesamecasemay

be usedbyinstructorsfordifferentpurposes, sopart of thechallenge of briefing

is toidentifythoseissues in thecase, whichare of

centralimportancetothetopicunderdiscussion in class.


Decisions

(Holdings)


Thedecision, or holding, is

thecourt’sanswerto a questionpresentedto it foranswerbythepartiesinvolvedorraisedbythecourtitself

in itsownreading of thecase. Therearenarrowproceduralholdings, forexample,

“casereversedandremanded,”

broadersubstantiveholdingswhichdealwiththeinterpretation of theConstitution,

statutes, orjudicialdoctrines. Iftheissueshavebeendrawnprecisely, theholdings

can be stated in simple “yes” or “no” answersor in

shortstatementstakenfromthelanguageusedbythecourt.


Reasoning (Rationale)


Thereasoning,

orrationale, is thechain of argument, whichledthejudges in either a majorityor

a dissentingopiniontorule as theydid. Thisshould be outlinedpointbypoint in

numberedsentencesorparagraphs.


SeparateOpinions


Bothconcurringanddissentingopinionsshould

be subjectedtothesamedepth of analysistobringoutthemajorpoints of

agreementordisagreementwiththemajorityopinion. Make a note of how

eachjusticevotedand how he orshelinedup. Knowledge of how judges of a

particularcourtnormallylineup on particularissues is essentialtoanticipating

how theywillvote in futurecasesinvolvingsimilarissues.


Analysis:


Here

thestudentshouldevaluatethesignificance of thecase,

itsrelationshiptoothercases, itsplace in history, andwhat is showsaboutthe

Court, itsmembers, itsdecision-makingprocesses, ortheimpact it has on

litigants, government, orsociety. It is here

thattheimplicitassumptionsandvalues of theJusticesshould be probed, the

“rightness” of thedecisiondebated, andthelogic of thereasoningconsidered.


Wasthiscasedecidedfairly? Whyorwhy not?

Identifyanduseyourownstandards.


Property Rights and Economic Liberties

*

Profile Armour v. the

City of Indianapolis ( 2012) accordingtothecasebriefrubric .

*Profile

Harmon v. Markus (2011) according to the rubric used previously.

May 15, 2022
SOLUTION.PDF

Get Answer To This Question

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here