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 thecourtâspublishedopinion. Sometimes, thebeststatement of
thefactswill be found in a dissentingorconcurringopinion. WARNING! Judgesare
not abovebeingselectiveaboutthefactstheyemphasize. This can become of
crucialimportancewhenyoutrytoreconcileapparentlyinconsistentcases,
becausetheway a judgechoosestocharacterizeand âeditâ
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,
watchoutfortheoccasionaljudgewhomisstatesthequestionsraisedbythelowercourtâsopinion,
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
âyesâ or âno.â
Forexample, thefamouscase of Brown
v. Board of Educationinvolvedtheapplicability of a provision of the 14th
Amendmenttothe U.S. Constitutionto a schoolboardâspractice of
excludingblackpupilsfromcertainpublicschoolssolelyduetotheirrace.
Theprecisewording of theAmendment is ânostateshall…
denytoanypersonwithinitsjurisdictiontheequalprotection of thelaws.â
Thecarefulstudentwouldbeginbyidentifyingthekeyphrasesfromthisamendmentanddecidingwhich
of themwerereally at issue in thiscase.
Assumingthattherewasnodoubtthattheschool board wasacting as theState,
andthatMiss Brown was a âpersonwithinitsjurisdiction,â thenthekeyissuewould
be âDoestheexclusion of studentsfrom a publicschoolsolely on thebasis of
raceamountto a denial of âequalprotection of thelawsâ?â
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 âseparate but equalâ facilitiesdid not denythem âequalprotection
of thelaws.â 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, âproceduralissues,â
âsubstantiveissues,â âlegal issue,â 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
thecourtâsanswerto a questionpresentedto it foranswerbythepartiesinvolvedorraisedbythecourtitself
in itsownreading of thecase. Therearenarrowproceduralholdings, forexample,
âcasereversedandremanded,â
broadersubstantiveholdingswhichdealwiththeinterpretation of theConstitution,
statutes, orjudicialdoctrines. Iftheissueshavebeendrawnprecisely, theholdings
can be stated in simple âyesâ or ânoâ 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
ârightnessâ 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.