PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE II

LAW4511

CASE BRIEFING

1
 WHAT IS A CASE BRIEF?

• A condensed, concise outline-form summary of a court

opinion.  Hence, the term “brief”; OR
• It refers to a short synopsis of a case; OR
• A method for taking organized notes on a “case”.
• Instead of reading a 25 page case, for example, many
legal practitioners will ask their clerks (or their
associates) to summarize a case – or to “brief” the case.
• The brief will give the practitioner the information he or
she requires, to decide whether the case is relevant and
worth spending the time to read in depth.
2
 PURPOSES OF CASE BRIEF
• This is one way of forcing one to ask key questions that
assist one in understanding the decision. 
• The summary/brief provides a quick and easy means of
recalling what one has read. 
• The summary/brief puts one in a position to start asking
critical questions about a judicial decision.
• Hence the summary – to help learning about the
contents of the decision,  recalling those contents at
some point in the future, and preparing the way for
critical reflection.
• It is also used to present the case to others: “case brief”
3
 Additional Benefits
• A case brief should be prepared whenever you or
another party needs quick access to the information
in the case, or in the event that you will likely
reference this case again in future legal opinion
writing.  
• Having a database of well‐written case briefs can be a
valuable time‐saving tool.  If you keep them organized
properly on your computer or in your files, you will be
able to quickly refresh your memory of the case and
determine whether it will help you in your future
legal research projects.
4
 Summarizing and Paraphrasing
• With the exception of the specific rule of law (which
should almost always be quoted), the case brief
should be a summary and paraphrasing of the court’s
opinion in your own words.  
• This forces you to understand the court’s opinion
much more deeply.
• Briefs should not be longer than one to TWO PAGES
long and should be easy to read so that the reader
does not have to spend much time understanding the
reasoning of the case.
5
 CASE BRIEF FORMAT
• There are probably as many different possible case brief
formats as there are lawyers.  
• One has some flexibility in how one organizes its content.  
• It is wise to adopt a method that is comfortable for you
and others who read your briefs and to maintain that
method for consistency. 
• The format shown here is meant only to be a sample to
teach you how case briefs work, and how some typical
sections within case briefs work.
• It is not meant to identify the “one perfect case brief
format.”
6
 CASE BRIEF FORMAT OUTLINE
1. CITATION
2. CASE NAME
3. COURT NAME
4. DATE OF THE DECISION
5. PRIOR PROCEEDINGS
6. FACTS
7. OBJECTIVES (of Parties)
8. THEORIES (of the Parties)
9. ISSUE(S)
10.DECISION(S)/JUDGMENT(S)
11.REASONING
12.RULE, Explanation and Application
13.CONCURRING OPINION(S) REASONING
14.DISSENTING OPINION(S) REASONING
15.POLICY
16.DISPOSITION
17.DICTA
18.COMMENTS
19.SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CASE
7
 Keep it to Two Pages!
• How will you fit all of that information on two
pages?  
• Answer: By using short, substantive sentences.  
• Avoid writing in a verbose manner; don’t use
more words than necessary to convey a point.  
• The case brief is meant to be highly condensed
and to give the reader only the information that
is essential to their understanding of the case.

8
 Sample Case-Brief Format

• CITATION: The citation is information about the case that

the reader can use to find the case in a library, and to
assess the relevance of the opinion to future cases.
• A case citation (or “cite”) should tell the reader five things:
o the name of the case (meaning the parties who are
involved in the case);
o where the reader can find the case;
o the particular page being cited to, if any;
o when the case was decided; and
o which court decided it.

9
• CASE NAME (to identify the parties): In a civil case,
who has sued and who is being sued? In a criminal
case, who has the state charged with a crime, and
which authority of state is doing the charging.?
• Some cases have more than one party on one side or
on both sides.
• In addition to names, try to identify the procedural
categories that each party falls into (that is, Appellant
or Respondent? Plaintiff or defendant below?) and the
legally significant factual categories for each party, as
well (employer or employee? Husband or wife? Driver
or passenger?).

10
• The procedural categories will be pretty similar from
case to case (almost every trial has a defendant, for
example), while the factual categories will vary
depending on the facts and issues that each case
presents.
• Generally, after you complete this list of labels, you
will want to refer to the parties by their legally
significant categories.
• Sometimes the procedural category can be legally
significant (especially in courses where you are
addressing procedural issues – like civil procedure).
More often, though, what is significant is that the
person was a homeowner or a driver or a landlord. Of
course, if that category label isn’t handy, you may
11
decide to use another label.
• PRIOR PROCEEDINGS: This is the disposition of the case in
the lower court(s) that explains how the case got to the court
whose opinion you are reading.
• Include the following:
a. The decision(s) of the lower court(s). That is, in a civil case,
did the court find in favor of the plaintiff or the
defendant? In a criminal case, did the court find that the
defendant was guilty or not guilty?
NOTE: If the case was decided by a trial court and
reviewed by an intermediate appellate court before
reaching the court whose decision you are now reading,
be sure to note what each court decided.
b. The damages awarded, if relevant.
• In no case should this section exceed TWO sentences. 

12
• FACTS: In this section, list the facts that happened “in
the world” that got the case into court.
• In a civil case, this usually means asking why the
plaintiff sued the defendant – what did the defendant
[allegedly] do wrong? Is there anything relevant
about the personal or professional relationship
between the parties?
• In a criminal case, what did the accused [allegedly]
do wrong that got him or her arrested and charged
with a crime? Did the police [allegedly] do something
wrong in the way they arrested or interrogated the
defendant that is the basis for a motion, or for the
appeal?
13
• If a main issue in the case is a procedural issue rather than an
issue about “the merits,” the relevant facts will be different.
E.g., if Johan is accused of murder, a merits question is whether
or not Johan committed the murder, and another merits
question might be whether Johan had the requisite intent.
Procedural issues might be whether Johan’s arrest and
confession were handled appropriately by the police.
• The facts you include in your fact section will vary depending
on the issues before the court in the case you are reading. Your
facts will generally include the “legally significant facts” and the
“relevant background facts.”
o Legally significant facts: Facts which, if they were different,
might mean that the outcome of the case would be
different.
o Relevant background facts: Facts that help you understand,
organize, or think about the legally significant facts.
14
• Your statement of the facts should be
ONE short paragraph in length.
• The words should be your own—not the
words of the court.  This ensures that
you understand the facts of the case and
can easily explain them in the context of
the legal argument being made.  
• Your focus should be on the complaint
and the reason it was filed in the first
place, which will come forth in the fact
statement of the court’s opinion. 15
• OBJECTIVES (of Parties) : What did each side want
the court to do, procedurally? Affirm, reverse,
reverse and remand, grant the motion, deny the
motion, vacate a decision below? Use of precise
language is important here.

• THEORIES OF THE PARTIES: What is the legal basis

for each party’s objective? What law or theory
shows that the court should do what each side
wants? [Note that the court may give a party
what it wants based on a legal theory different
than the one proposed].
16
• ISSUE(S): In this section, identify the legal
question(s) that the court is answering.
Generally, a formal issue statement will include
3 elements:
(1) the legal context (usually the area of law is
relevant, and maybe a particular statute or
other enacted law),
(2) the narrow legal question (a yes or no
question), and
(3) the factual context.

17
The “issue” part of the case brief may need to
remain open until you have read the entire
case.
Ideally, you should read the case through
before briefing; however, you may be able to
brief sections of the case as you read, e.g., the
facts.
If you brief as you proceed section by section,
leave the issue blank until you can formulate a
correct statement of the issue.

18
Language that the court uses might include such
phrases as:
"The question before us is whether...."
"This case was brought before us to
decide whether..."
Appellate courts hear a case on appeal when there
has been a problem with the case in the court
below. The problem could be an error that the court
made or the appellate court may want to take the
case because the lower courts in its jurisdiction are
not consistent in their decisions. By taking this
case, it gives the higher court a chance to give
guidance and establish precedent for the lower
courts to follow. 19
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION—CASE LAW
• Issue not stated—In some opinions, the court never clearly states
what the issue is in the case.
• Broad statement of the issue—”The issue in this case is whether
the defendant breached the contract.”
• Issue stated in the procedural context—”The issue in this case is
whether the trial court erred when it granted the motion to
suppress the evidence.”
• The court stated the issue in the context of how the case came
before the court procedurally—an appeal of a trial court order
granting a motion to suppress. To answer this question, the court
actually addressed a substantive question raised by the facts of the
case, and the substantive issue is what the case is actually about.

20
 ORGANIZING ISSUE:
A. Step 1: General Question
• Read the entire court opinion before attempting to identify
the issue. When reading the case, ask yourself, “What was
decided about which facts in this case?” or “What question
concerning which law and key facts was decided by the
court?”
• “What was decided ...” keeps the mind focused on searching
for the legal issue that was resolved and the law necessary
for its resolution.
• “About which facts ...” keeps the mind focused on looking for
the facts essential to the resolution of the legal question.

21
• B. Step 2: Look to the Judgment/Holding
• 1. “What was decided in the judgment?” “What issue was
addressed and answered by the judgment?” This identifies the
second element of the issue, the legal question addressed by
the court.
• 2. “What statute, rule of law, principle, and so on, did the
court apply to reach this holding?” This question helps identify
the relevant rule of law, the first element of the issue.
• 3. “Which of the facts presented in this case are related and
necessary to the determination of the question identified as
addressed in the holding?” or “Which of the facts, if changed,
would change the outcome of the holding?” These questions
help identify the third element of the issue, the key facts.
22
• C. Step 3: Assemble the Issue
• Assemble the identified elements in the “Law + Legal Question +
Key Facts” format.

• D. Other Aides—Case Law Issue Identification

• Concurring or Dissenting Opinion
• Be aware, however, that the concurring or dissenting judge may
have a different view of what the issue is, especially in the case
of a dissent.
• Other Opinions
• Reading other opinions cited in the case may provide guidance
concerning the issue in the case you are researching.
23
• E. Multiple Issues
• Where there is more than one issue, apply the steps
discussed previously to all the issues in the case.
• Make sure that the court’s resolution of the other
issues does not in some way impact the issue on
which you are focused.
• Read the entire opinion and check for any overlap of
the issues or inter-connectedness of the reasoning.

24
• DECISION(S)/HOLDING(S): Some people use the word
“decision” or “holding” to describe how the court disposed of the
case, e.g., “the court held for the defendant.” Others use it more
formally to mean “the rule of the case” – in other words, the legal
rule in the context of the facts of this case.
• This section should only include the analysis performed by the
majority if it is a split decision.
• Decision is a statement of law that is the court’s answer to the
issue. If you have written the issue statement(s) correctly, the
holding is often the positive or negative statement of the issue
statement.
• When drafting your case briefs, you may want to try to find the
decsion of the case first. The decision can provide a snapshot of
the case and give you context as you read the opinion.
• You may also want to review the decision last, to make sure that
you properly identified the decision and that it is consistent with
the rest of the brief. 25
• REASONING: How did the court get from the issue to the judgment? Did
it break the case down into sub-issues? What rules did it use? What methods
of reasoning? How did it apply the rule(s) to the facts before it? Did it
analogize the current case to or distinguish it from previous cases? Did it rely
on relevant policy arguments to help it choose between two or more logically
possible options? Did the court modify the original rule to get the result?
• The reasoning section is usually the most important part of the case brief. In
general, you want to work in two steps.
o First, identify the issues that the court analyzed. Courts may refer to lots of
issues; you want to identify the issues or sub-issues that they analyzed: the
issues that they reached a conclusion on by using the law and the facts.
o After you identify the issues they analyzed, look for three elements for each
issue you have identified: (1) the rule (or governing legal principle), (2) the
court’s explanation of what that rule means, and (3) how the rule applies to
the facts of the case. You don’t necessarily have to write these three things
out as separate elements, but having them in mind can help you as you
mentally organize the court’s analysis.
• Some lawyers combine the holding with the reasoning/ analysis section for
brevity.  That is a matter of preference.  
26
• RULE: In this context ‘rule’ means the governing legal
principle’. This is the rule of law that the court applies to
determine the substantive rights of the parties.
• The rule of law could derive from a statute, case rule,
regulation, or may be a synthesis of prior holdings in similar
cases (common law).
• The rule or legal principle may be expressly stated in the
opinion or it may be implied.
o What rule of law is announced in the case?  A court first
must announce a specific controlling principle of law (e.g.
the court's interpretation of a constitutional provision, NOT
the constitutional provision itself!) that applies to the issue
in the case.  
o This is also the abstract, general legal principle that will be
applied to all future cases involving this issue, using this
case as a precedent, and it is important to understand
under what factual circumstances the rule applies.  27
• In some cases that you read, you will probably see
references to many different kinds of rules.
• Your job will be to distinguish the rules that are relevant
but tangential from the rules that articulate the legal
principles that govern the court’s analysis of each issue and
sub-issue.
• When beginning to analyze the reasoning, first make sure
you understand the legal context in which the case is set
(you should have begun this task when you articulated the
issue).
• Generally, if there is a statute, a constitutional provision, or
other enacted law at issue, you should begin there. Is the
court applying that enacted law to this situation? Is there a
dispute about what certain words or phrases within the
enacted law mean? 28
• In addition to statutes and other enacted law,
you should look for “common law” rules –
that is, rules of law that come from court
decisions rather than from legislatures.
• There is often interaction between statutory
law and common law rules (e.g., some rules
that originate in the common law are later
made statutes, and some statutes are
interpreted using common law rules), but
some cases are solely about common law
rules.
29
 INHERITED OR PROCESSED RULE?
• You should be aware of one other factor when looking for the rule. The
cases that appear in law textbooks are often cases in which the court
has staked out new ground. Many students read phrases like, “The rule
in this area has always been thus-and-so,” and presume that they have
found the rule. Unfortunately for these students, they may miss the
sentence a few paragraphs later in which the court says, “we now hold
that the old rule is unconstitutional [or stupid, or irrelevant, or
whatever].”
• Thus, Professor Linda Edwards of Mercer advises that students look to
see if there is
o an “inherited rule,” i.e., the “old” rule that has always been applied in
cases like this.
o She then advises that students look to see if the court has changed
the inherited rule into a new rule, which she calls the “processed
rule.”
30
• Some law teachers will probably not use these
same vocabulary terms, but the terms may be
helpful for you to keep in mind as you try to identify
the court’s reasoning. You shouldn’t necessarily skip
over an “inherited rule,” because identifying the
inherited rule may help you understand the court’s
reasoning.
• Some law teachers may want to talk about both the
inherited rule and the processed rule (not
necessarily using that vocabulary), while others will
want to discuss only the processed rule.

31
• Explanation: Often the court will usually explain why the rule
is being created or applied, such as the origin of the rule, or the
policy behind the rule existing, and also will often explain why
any alternative rules proposed by the parties or the dissenting
justices are being rejected.  
• Here the court usually looks at the words of a constitutional or
statutory provision, the original intent behind that law, and
public policy arguments. These are not the rule itself, but the
explanation of, or justification for, the rule.  You must quote
precisely the actual rule itself.
• But the justification for the rule should be primarily in your own
words – in other words, the principle that the court is using to
decide the issue. All statutes are rules, for example, but the rule
governing a particular issue may not be the statute in the case,
because the court may be using a different rule to decide the
meaning of a particular word or phrase within the statute.
32
• Application: When a court applies law to facts, it shows how
the rule connects or doesn’t connect to the facts of the case.
(Some people use the phrase “apply the facts to the law” to
mean the same thing.)
• In some cases, the application is obvious once the knotty legal
problem of what the words mean has been solved, and so the
court may spend little time on application.
• How courts apply the rule to the facts and analyze the case
must be understood in order to properly predict outcomes in
future cases involving the same issue. What does the court
consider to be a relevant fact given the rule of law? How does
the court interpret the rule: for example, does the court
consider monetary costs of providing security patrols in
weighing the burden of preventive measures? Does the court
imply that if a business is in a dangerous area, then it should be
willing to bear a higher cost for security?
33
• Separate opinions:
• In split decisions, some judges join the majority
opinion and others either concur or dissent.  
• Each separate concurrence or dissent should be
explained.
• Examples:
o CONCURRING OPINION(S) REASONING: The judge
agrees with the outcome of the majority decision
but not with the analysis used to reach that
outcome in that ….  
o DISSENTING OPINION(S) REASONING:  The judge
disagrees with the outcome and the analysis used
to reach that outcome by the majority in that…
34
• POLICY: This section won’t necessarily be a
formal part of every case brief, or of every
decision or opinion. Law teachers will
sometimes/always/never want to talk about it.
Some of your law teachers may discuss “public
policy” or ask you to identify policy reasons that
could justify the court’s holding, while others
will rarely or never mention it. You should be
aware of it, though, because it often makes the
difference in a case outcome, whether the
policy is spoken or unspoken.
35
• Generally, a “public policy” is a strongly held societal belief
or understanding that supports a rule. When these societal
beliefs change, rules change. For example, some five years
ago, people smoked almost anywhere, and there were few
if any laws forbidding smoking. As society began to
understand the dangers of secondhand smoke, rules of law
changed to restrict the places in which people were
allowed to smoke; this change was based on a public policy
in favor of public health.
• Thus, when analyzing the court’s reasoning, look to see if
the court justified itself by referring to a societal belief or
understanding about human behavior, the role of law, the
role of certain institutions in society, etc.

36
• Very often there will be two logically plausible/possible results to a case.
The court may well make its decision (consciously or unconsciously) based
on which decision best promotes public policy. If there are competing
policies – i.e., a decision in either party’s favor would support some kind of
public policy – the court must decide which policy is more important in this
situation. For example, a court might decide that protecting the health of
non-smokers is more important than protecting the freedom of choice of
smokers.

• You can often see the policy reflected in the way that the court articulates
the issue or the rule. In a smoking case, for example, a court might ask
whether employers should be allowed to let their employees participate in
legal activities during working hours even though some employees may find
these activities unhealthy or bothersome. The court could also ask whether
employers should be required to restrict an activity that harms the health
of all workers.

37
• DISPOSITION: This is the court’s final decision as to the rights of
the parties, the court’s response to a party’s request for relief.
Generally, the appellate court will either affirm, reverse, or
reverse with instructions. The judgment is usually found at the
end of the opinion. In this section, record how the court disposed
of the case. Did it affirm, reverse, reverse and remand, vacate?
Did it grant the motion or deny the motion? If further action is
contemplated (e.g., if a court “remands” a case, it is generally
sending it back to a lower court to take action), you might note
the action that is contemplated.
• Try to use the precise procedural terms here. For example,
motions are “granted,” or “denied.” They are not “upheld” or
“overturned.” An appellate court “reverses” or “affirms” or
“vacates” or “reverses and remands” a decision submitted to it for
review. It does not “strike down” or “overrule” the decision
submitted to it. These terms have precise legal meanings, and so
you should strive to use them accurately. 38
• OBITER DICTA: “Dicta” means statements or analysis
by the court that are not needed for the court to
arrive at its holding. Generally, dicta means court
comments on issues that are not currently before it.
“This case is about dogs. If it were about cats, we
would reverse, but because it is about dogs, we will
affirm.”
• In a future case about cats, a court would not be
obligated to follow this court’s hypothetical rule about
a cat case. Of course, if the court finds the
hypothetical rule persuasive, it may always decide to
adopt it.
• Some law teachers may not ask you about dicta, but
you should learn to recognize the difference between
holdings and dicta. 39
• COMMENTS: What are your reactions to
and critique of the opinion? Anything you
like? Dislike? How does this case fall in line
with the other cases you have read?
• Do not accept the court’s opinion blindly.
Assess the reasoning in each case. Is it
sound? Is it contradictory? What are the
impacts of the decision on the public at
large - political, economic or social?  
40
• SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CASE: What is the
significance of the case in the overall field of
law and policy? Does the case still represents a
good law?
You would especially want to include this
section when the case:
o changes a previously accepted approach to
something;  
o overturns a significant law or questions a
line of cases; or  
o holds a law unconstitutional.

41
The End

42