A BRIEF GUIDE TO LEGAL CASE BRIEFS I. CITATION/ PROCEDURAL HISTORY From what specific source is the case taken? US Court of Appeals? US Supreme Court? How did the case reach this court? Who won/lost below and appealed to the higher court? II. THE FACTS What materially happened and ONLY what materially happened? What does the plaintiff want the court to do for him/her? III. LEGAL ISSUES A. General · What specific legal questions does this case raise?  · What is the statutory, constitutional or other provision that the court is now considering? · The 1st Amendment, The Voting Rights Act, The Clean Air Act B. Specific · What specifically must the court consider from the general provision? · For example, the scope of Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment? IV. THE HOLDING · What decision was made? That is, in support of which side did the court hold?  · For example, “the court held that Congress has the power to enact the Family and Medical Leave Act pursuant to its power under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.” V. LEGAL RATIONALE · What legal reasoning informed the court's decision? · What rules of law, for example, did it apply? · How did it interpret legal principles, documents? · What POLICY informed the court’s decision? VI. SECOND GENERATION QUESTIONS · What existing legal questions, if any, are unresolved by this case? · What new questions, if any, does it raise? How to Brief a Case [ Detailed Version ] Briefs should be a one-two page summary of the case. Structure the summary according to the elements listed below. The structure adheres to the types of questions the professor asks in class and to the information you'll need for outlining. Not every case can be summed up in one page, but it's a good discipline to attempt to condense the material. Citation and Procedural History The heading should contain citation information as well as the author of the majority opinion How did this case get to this particular court? Typically, you will be reading case law from the Appeals Court or Supreme Court. That means the case has already been decided at a lower court and the losing party has appealed to a higher court. Typically, the lower courts don't write opinions on their decisions, consequently, you'll almost always be reading appellate decisions. The judge often starts the case with information on how the court below decided the case and which party is making the appeal. Often the cases will present a detailed history of the arguments presented by both parties in the court below as well. At minimum, you should be able to answer the following two questions that your professor is likely to ask in class: Who is appealing on what issues? What happened in the lower court? Facts of Case A well-written case brief provides the relevant facts that brought the parties to court. The bulk of the relevant facts are often found early in the opinion. Legal Issue A well-writt.

1. A BRIEF GUIDE TO LEGAL CASE BRIEFS
I. CITATION/ PROCEDURAL HISTORY
From what specific source is the case taken? US Court of
Appeals? US Supreme Court?
How did the case reach this court? Who won/lost below and
appealed to the higher court?
II. THE FACTS
What materially happened and ONLY what materially
happened? What does the
plaintiff want the court to do for him/her?
III. LEGAL ISSUES
A. General
· What specific legal questions does this case raise?
· What is the statutory, constitutional or other provision that the
court is now considering?
· The 1st Amendment, The Voting Rights Act, The Clean Air
Act
B. Specific
· What specifically must the court consider from the general
provision?
· For example, the scope of Section 5 of the Fourteenth
Amendment?
IV. THE HOLDING
· What decision was made? That is, in support of which side did
the court hold?
· For example, “the court held that Congress has the power to
enact the Family and Medical Leave Act pursuant to its power
under Section 5 of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
V. LEGAL RATIONALE
· What legal reasoning informed the court's decision?

2. · What rules of law, for example, did it apply?
· How did it interpret legal principles, documents?
· What POLICY informed the court’s decision?
VI. SECOND GENERATION QUESTIONS
· What existing legal questions, if any, are unresolved by this
case?
· What new questions, if any, does it raise?
How to Brief a Case [ Detailed Version ]
Briefs should be a one-two page summary of the case. Structure
the summary according to the elements listed below. The
structure adheres to the types of questions the professor asks in
class and to the information you'll need for outlining. Not every
case can be summed up in one page, but it's a good discipline to
attempt to condense the material.
Citation and Procedural History
The heading should contain citation information as well as the
author of the majority opinion
How did this case get to this particular court? Typically, you
will be reading case law from the Appeals Court or Supreme
Court. That means the case has already been decided at a lower
court and the losing party has appealed to a higher court.
Typically, the lower courts don't write opinions on their
decisions, consequently, you'll almost always be reading
appellate decisions.
The judge often starts the case with information on how the
court below decided the case and which party is making the
appeal. Often the cases will present a detailed history of the
arguments presented by both parties in the court below as well.
At minimum, you should be able to answer the following two

3. questions that your professor is likely to ask in class:
Who is appealing on what issues? What happened in the lower
court?
Facts of Case
A well-written case brief provides the relevant facts that
brought the parties to court.
The bulk of the relevant facts are often found early in the
opinion.
Legal Issue
A well-written opinion starts out by telling you the legal issue
up-front. Language that the court uses might include such
phrases as:
"The question before us is whether...." “This case is before us
to decide whether..."
Note:
If you're having trouble spotting the issue try to key into the
word "whether."
It often signals what the turning point for a case.
Appellate courts hear a case on appeal when there has been a
problem with the case in the court below. By taking this case,
it gives the higher court a chance to give guidance and establish
precedent for the lower courts to follow.
Holding

4. The holding is the court's decision on the issue. Who wins? The
holding may be narrowly construed to a particular issue or be
very broad. Identifying the holding may merely consist of
finding the words "We hold that..."
The holding should include the disposition of the case. Is the
ruling of the lower court affirmed? Overturned? Remanded for
retrial?
Legal Rationale
The reasoning is the arm of IRAC. This is how and why the
court fits the particular facts and circumstances of this case into
the rule. The courts often fashion tests or rely on precedent,
which forms part of the reasoning. You should take special note
of the reasoning and try to emulate it in your own writing.
Policy
Rules don't stand by themselves without any sort of reason
behind them. If there isn't a sound policy behind a rule, then the
court tries to fashion a rule that serves the principles of equity
or justice. Sometimes a statute that does not further the policies
of equity or justice binds the judge. In those circumstances, the
judge sometimes upholds the statute but writes the opinion in
such a way to bring the injustice to the attention of the
legislature in order to encourage them to change the law.
Concurrence/ Dissents [ if applicable ]
A Concurrence is a separate opinion in which one of the judges
agrees with the result but has different reasoning. Like dissents,

5. you will find that concurrences proliferate in Supreme Court
cases. Look at the concurrence to see how the reasoning differs.
Make a note of it in the brief.
Typically, a panel of judges tries appellate cases. Not
surprisingly, there is not always unanimous agreement.
Consequently, a judge who is not in the majority will write a
dissent. Dissents are ubiquitous in Supreme Court cases. Make
sure that you pick up the major sticking points in the dissent.
What principles does the dissenting judge disagree with the
majority on? Dissents are sometimes indicators of a direction
the court may eventually move towards.
Second Generation Questions
What is left open by the court’s decision?
What might a litigant next bring before the court?
CITATION:
Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)
Procedural History: Defendant ( ∆ ) Miranda Appeals from Ariz
Supreme Ct
FACTS: Miranda (∆) was arrested and taken to the police
station where officers questioned him for two hours. ∆ signed a
confession. The confession stated that it was made voluntarily
and that ∆ had full knowledge of his legal rights. ∆'s confession
was used against him at trial and over ∆'s objection. ∆ was
convicted of rape and kidnapping and received 20 years. The
state supreme court affirmed the conviction. ∆ appealed to the
United States Supreme Court.
LEGAL ISSUE: Must law enforcement officials inform an
accused of his constitutional rights? Are statements obtained
from an individual subjected to in custody police interrogation

6. admissible if ∆ has not been notified of his “right to remain
silent” under the 5th Amendment?
HOLDING: The Court Held That--- Incriminating statements
made by an individual are only admissible if the following
safeguards have been taken; and/or, when a person is taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom, the following
warnings must be given:
“∆ has the right to remain silent; that anything he says can be
used against him in a court of law; that he has the right to have
an attorney present; and if he cannot afford an attorney one will
be appointed for him.”
REASONING: (Warren, C.J.) Yes. When a person is taken into
custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom, the warnings
must be given. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self
incrimination [i.e. taking the 5th] is jeopardized when a person
is taken into custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom.
Previously the Court has held that such warnings were not
required but instead represented a “safe harbor” for the police
to ensure that a confession is both knowingly and intelligently
made. Yet, heretofore, no confession obtained as a result of an
“in custody” interrogation can be used against a person unless
the prosecution has shown that the person had been “read
his/her rights.” This favors a policy of making suspect aware of
the nature of their rights as well as making the acquisition of
confession easier for the police. Essentially, so long as the
police read the warnings they will have complied with the 5th
amendment.
Dissent: (White, Justice) The Fifth Amendment forbids only
self-incrimination only if it is compelled. The core of the
majority's opinion is that there is compulsion inherent in
custodial surroundings and that no statement made while in
custody can be the product of free choice unless the protective
devices as described by the court are used. There is insufficient

7. evidence support the inherently coercive nature of “in-custody”
confessions.
Second Generation Questions: What counts as “in custody” for
Miranda purposes? To what extent must a suspect
actually understand the warnings in order to intelligently waive
them?