Case Brief

How to Brief a Legal Case
Valerie Lang Waldin, J.D., M.L.S.

What is a case brief?
A case brief is a condensed, concise outline-form summary of a court
opinion.
A law student’s case brief is very different from a legal brief by an
attorney, and an undergraduate student’s case brief will differ from a
law student’s.
A community college student’s case brief will differ from an that of an
undergraduate depending on the course of study.
This guide is intended primarily for community college students.
Basic Format for a Case Brief:
• Generally, a case brief takes this form (we will address these individually):
• Facts
• Issue
• Holding or Ruling
• Application of the law to the facts of the case (can also be called Rationale, or
Reasoning)
• Bottom line: Follow your professor’s

specific format instructions.
This brief format is a little more involved:
• EXAMPLE: Constitutional Law - Case Brief Format for Final Project
• Name of Case:
• Citation:
• Prior Proceedings:
• Facts:
• Issue(s):
• Decision (or Holding or Ruling) of Supreme Court:

• Author of Majority Opinion:
• Reasoning of Majority Opinion:
• Summary of Other Opinions (dissenting, concurring):
Keep in mind:
United States Supreme Court
cases are characteristically
lengthier and more detailed
than state cases.
Example: Mapp v. Ohio, 81

S.Ct. 1684, 1961 is a pivotal
case in which evidence seized
by an unconstitutional search
was inadmissible (under the
4th and 14th Amendments).
THIS is why we brief cases.
• Mapp v. Ohio (as shown on Cornell's Legal Information Institute site)
Let’s break it down piece by
piece.
*Depending on your professor’s instructions…
2 ½ to 3 typed pages total (length approximations recommended

below; will vary depending on case):
Facts 1 page
Issue 1 sentence
Holding or Ruling 1-2 sentences
Application 1 – 1 ½ pages
FACTS
This is the text of of Mapp v. Ohio
provided on the Cornell Legal
Information Institute site.
The FACTS of a legal case usually are

stated in a few paragraphs at the
beginning of the judge’s opinion.
FACTS
ISSUE
ISSUE = What is the question the parties

are asking the court to resolve?
Issue
End of facts (Facts of course may be referred to again in
the opinion, but basically this is the end of the fact
pattern for purposes of your brief.)
The ISSUE is normally

found after the fact
summary but before the
court gets into legal
precedent and explaining
its reasoning.
When writing the brief,

you need to condense the
issue into a manageable
legal question.
Here the court is starting to discuss prior court decisions

(legal precedent), the Constitution, and applicable
statutes, paving the way for the HOLDING (decision) with
its REASONING.
HOLDING
HOLDING (OR RULING OR DECISION) =
What did the court decide?
(Affirmed, Reversed, Remanded?)
Holding
The Holding (may also be called Ruling)
is a statement of the court’s decision. It
will appear at the end of the opinion.
We will come back to concurring and

dissenting opinions; for now just know
that the Holding (Ruling) is stated at the
end of the majority opinion, which is
the decision & reasoning of the
majority of the judges of a court,
written by one judge.
Justice Clark wrote the majority opinion

for the Court in Mapp v. Ohio.
APPLICATION
Application or Reasoning = Why did the court
decide as it did?
APPLICATION of the law to
the facts of the case
Critical part of case

(APPLICATION, REASONING)
as it applies the law to the
facts of the case thereby
setting legal precedent
Let’s go back to Westlaw for
a second.
“A headnote is a single sentence that reflects a point of law
made by the court. Attorney-editors craft a headnote for
Headnotes every specific point of law covered in every published
opinion, making it possible to quickly determine what the
case means and whether it is relevant.”
http://blog.legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/legal-
research/reference-attorney-tips/07-08-13/
Headnotes are written by

Westlaw attorney-editors.
Headnotes concisely state

the points of law (or legal
concepts) in the case.
Invaluable!
As indicated early on:
• A law student case brief is very different from a brief by an attorney,

and an undergraduate student’s brief will differ from a law student’s.
• This guide to case law briefing is intended primarily for community

college students.
So what does a finished
BRIEF look like?
Westlaw briefs are sophisticated legal briefs submitted by licensed attorneys practicing
before the United States Supreme Court.
If you select “Brief It” when printing a case
in Westlaw, you will only get the case
Headnotes!
Headnotes are the legal points of law in the
case, but do not include sufficient facts,
articulation of the issue, or detailed
application of the law to the facts of the
case.
The Point:
You need to write your own brief based on
assignment instructions, and it should look
something like this:
Your Name
Course
Professor
Mapp v. Ohio 81 S.Ct.1684
• Facts: Three Cleveland police officers arrived at the petitioner’s residence on a tip that a bombing
suspect was hiding out there and that paraphernalia regarding the bombing was hidden there.
The officers knocked and asked to enter, but the petitioner refused to admit them without a
search warrant after speaking with her attorney. The officers left and returned approximately
three hours later with what seemed to be a search warrant. When the petitioner failed to answer
the door, the officers forcibly entered the residence. The petitioner’s attorney arrived and was not
permitted to see the petitioner or to enter the residence. The petitioner demanded to see the
search warrant and when presented, she grabbed it and placed it in her shirt. Police struggled
with the petitioner and eventually recovered the warrant. The petitioner was then placed under
arrest for being belligerent and taken to her bedroom on the second floor of the residence. The
officers then conducted a widespread search of the residence and found obscene materials in a
trunk in the basement. The petitioner was ultimately convicted of possessing these materials. The
petitioner/defendant was convicted in an Ohio Common Pleas Court and on appeal the Ohio
Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. Petitioner/defendant appealed to the U.S. Supreme
Court.
• Issue: Is evidence discovered during a search and seizure conducted in violation of the Fourth
Amendment of the Constitution admissible in a state court?
Mapp v. Ohio 81 S.Ct.1684
• Held. In a 6-3 decision, the Court overturned the petitioner’s conviction, and held that
the states were bound to exclude evidence seized in violation of the 4th Amendment.
• Application. In the majority opinion, Justice Tom Clark wrote for the Court that all
evidence obtained by searches and seizures in violation of the Constitution is
inadmissible in a state court. Justice Clark went on to say, “ Were it otherwise…the
assurance against unreasonable…searches and seizures would be meaningless.” The
purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter illegally obtaining evidence and to compel
respect for the constitutional guarantee in the only effective manner. The Court thus
ensured that in either state or federal court, no individual is to be convicted on
unconstitutional evidence. The 4th Amendment sets the standards for searches and
seizures by law enforcement officials in the United States, the Court noted, and the 14th
Amendment requires judges to uphold those standards in every state. Evidence gained
by an illegal search became inadmissible in state courts as a result of the Mapp decision.
The Court developed the exclusionary rule for illegal evidence, and drew on the Weeks
case, 1914, and Elkins, 1960, culminated with the decision reached in Mapp, 1961.
If your brief assignment is
more detailed…
…it’s really not that much more complicated.
EXAMPLE: Constitutional Law - Case Brief Format for Final Project
• Name of Case:
• Citation:
• Prior Proceedings:
• Facts:
• Issue(s):
• Decision (or Holding or Ruling) of Supreme Court:

• Author of Majority Opinion:
• Reasoning of Majority Opinion:
• Summary of Other Opinions (dissenting, concurring):
Citations are the volume number, Lower court decision and law reviews
reporter, and page number. These are (not the U.S. Supreme Court case)
called parallel citations because they
bring you to same case. It’s like a journal
article being published in multiple
journals.
Name of Case: Mapp v. Ohio

Citation: 392 U.S. 188 or S.Ct. 1868
Prior Proceedings: The petitioner/defendant

was convicted in an Ohio Common Pleas
Court and on appeal the Ohio Supreme Court
affirmed the conviction (16 O.O.2d 384).
Petitioner/defendant appealed to the U.S.
Supreme Court.
Summary of Other Opinions
(dissenting, concurring):
Summary of Other Opinions
(dissenting, concurring):
Dissenting (disagreeing) opinions

are usually found after
the concurring (supporting)
opinion.
And that is case briefing in a
nutshell.
Questions? Contact Valerie Lang Waldin, J.D., M.L.S. in the Marvin Library 141 or
visit the HVCC Law Research Genius.

Case Brief

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Brief

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Brief

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

How to Brief a Legal Case

Valerie Lang Waldin, J.D., M.L.S.

• Bottom line: Follow your professor’s

• Decision (or Holding or Ruling) of Supreme Court:

Example: Mapp v. Ohio, 81

2 ½ to 3 typed pages total (length approximations recommended

The FACTS of a legal case usually are

ISSUE = What is the question the parties

The ISSUE is normally

When writing the brief,

Here the court is starting to discuss prior court decisions

We will come back to concurring and

Justice Clark wrote the majority opinion

Critical part of case

Headnotes are written by

Headnotes concisely state

• A law student case brief is very different from a brief by an attorney,

• This guide to case law briefing is intended primarily for community

• Decision (or Holding or Ruling) of Supreme Court:

Name of Case: Mapp v. Ohio

Prior Proceedings: The petitioner/defendant

Dissenting (disagreeing) opinions

You might also like