CA Q 13. The court begins the first sentence of the opinion by stating that: “[t]he liability of an infant for an alleged battery is presented to this court for the first time.” ( i.e., Can a minor child be liable for an alleged battery?) Is THAT really the ISSUE in this case that should be included within your brief?

NO, this is NOT the legal issue in the Garrett case.

But, how can you know this (especially, given what the court says in this opening sentence of the opinion)?

By simply reading through the remainder of the entire case. For example, look ahead on page 2 of the edited opinion at paragraph 5 where the court explains that: “The authorities [generally state] that, when a minor has committed a tort with force, he is liable to be proceeded against as any other person would be.” The court continued by explaining even further that: “Brian, whether five or fifty-five, must have committed some wrongful act before he could be liable for the appellant’s injuries.” (Emphasis supplied). Thus, it is clear from these two statements that Brian Dailey’s AGE apparently is NOT a relevant factor in determining whether he will be liable for committing a wrongful act, with force.

This means that there MUST be a DIFFERENT ISSUE that this opinion addresses and resolves. That is the “ISSUE” that will go into your case brief. However, at this point in your reading and analysis of the Garratt case, you cannot yet articulate precisely what the "issue" of this case is (at least, for purposes of writing an "ISSUE" to be included within your BRIEF of the "Garratt case). Instead, you simply must keep reading and studying the court's analysis in the "Garratt case.

But, how can you proceed with PREPARING your case brief for the Garratt opinion, if you don't yet know what the real "ISSUE" in the case is is going to be?

The answer is easy. Simply SKIP OVER the "ISSUE" statement in your case brief and go on to the next component of your Brief. Then, later you can come back and FILL IN the CORRECT "ISSUE" after you have completed your reading and analysis of the court's opinion in this case.
© 2016 Edward C. Martin Contact Me