Case Brief #3 Assignment
Modified Case Briefs Description, Rubric
Understanding case law is essential to success in any law related class. Consequently, students will provide an analysis of three assigned cases to help their development and understanding of the legal issues presented. These case analyses, better known as ‘case briefs,’ will help students develop legal issues spotting techniques and provide an overview of how law applies to specific fact patterns.
The case briefs should be written in the following format, and see sample case brief following:
Facts: The facts briefly indicate (1) the reasons for the lawsuit, (2) the identity and arguments of the parties, and (3) the lower court’s decision (if applicable). This should be a summary that demonstrates your written communication and explanation skills.
Issue: The issue is the question before the court. The issue must be phrased as a question. Cases often have more the one issue (i.e., the court answers more than one question). If so, those questions should be listed here in chronological order. This section is meant to demonstrate your critical thinking skills as it requires identification of the central issue(s) between the parties and a clear statement of what the issue is.
Rule: The rule is simply the law the court uses to answer the question presented in the issue. This section requires the student to use critical thinking skills to identify the law that the court should consider in this case and clearly state it. Word for word re-statement is fine here
Application: This section requires you the student to apply the rule to the facts to answer the question presented in the issue. In brief, the application provides the reason(s) for your decision on the Issue identified. This part should be the longest as you are applying the facts to the law, as it is worth the most. Critical thinking skills are again required here as the students must take the facts as given and apply the law that is given to them. You will be graded by your ability to demonstrate the application of given facts to the laws that govern the issue, and your writing skills in conveying this application or analysis of the facts with the law.
Conclusion: Your decision on how to the resolve the Issue identified, after your application of the law to the facts. You must answer the issue presented based on your application of the law to the facts. You will be graded on how clear your response is based on the applicable law and facts.
Tyler Swish v. Cordashyan Inc. (2005)*
In 2003, Tyler Swish (“Swish”) created a computer-generated image (CGI) of a rainbow colored comedic raven. Swish’s raven would in a very low-pitched voice rap with rhyming lyrics, make fun of everyone it encountered, as it flew around in circles 5 feet above the object of its ridicule. Swish often posted videos of his CGI raven rapping and making fun of random people of all ages on his Instagram account, which had more than 3 million followers.
Cordashyan Inc. (“Cordashyan”) is a well-known company that specializes in selling cosmetic plastic press-on fingernails of all shapes, sizes and colors. Cordashyan’s net worth is estimated at $3 Billion. In January 2004 Cordashyan’s Director of Marketing, Cimmie Cordashyan learned about Swish’s raven. Cimmie absolutely loved the Swish raven character and believed she saw a marketing opportunity.
Cimmie shortly thereafter met with Swish to discuss use of the Swish raven as a sort of “mascot” in connection with advertising for the Cordashyan plastic fingernails. Swish met with Cimmie over the period of three days to discuss advertising possibilities using the Swish raven. After this meeting, Swish sent to Cimmie mock-ups, artwork, clothing, merchandise, and other ideas involving the Swish raven. Cimmie used the material, as well as her own powerpoint presentation, to try to pitch the idea of having the Swish raven be the new Cordashyan mascot, including for use in its advertising. The Cordashyan board loved the idea and had Swish make a sales proposal to sell the rights to the Swish raven to Cordashyan. Having researched the potential value of his raven including how popular it was on social media, Swift offered to sell his raven to Cordashyan for $200 Million. Cordashyan and Swish went back and forth on negotiations. The last they left it, Swish had reduced the offer to sell his raven to Cordashyan for $150 Million.
Within one week after the Swish $150 Million offer, which Cordashyan never responded to one way or another, Cordashyan hired Frump Advertising. Frump Advertising pitched the idea of an advertising campaign involving a rainbow colored raven that rapped and made fun of people. When Cimmie learned about this proposal by Frump Advertising, Cimmie sent Frump Advertising all of the Swish raven materials that Swish had provided to Cimmie. Cordashyan never signed an agreement with Swish. In 2005, Cordashyan began a very successful advertising campaign using a raven that looked just like the Swish raven except it was colored black only, and that made fun of people as it sang in opera voice to sell Cordashyan plastic fingernails.
Swish filed a lawsuit against Cordashyan Inc. in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Swish’s lawsuit claims that Cordashyan and Swish had an implied contract that was breached by Cordashyan.
For an implied contract to arise, certain requirements must be met. A court normally holds that an implied contract was formed if the following elements are met: First, plaintiff furnished some service or property. Next, plaintiff must have expected to be paid for that service or property, and the defendant knew or should have known that payment was expected. Lastly, the defendant must have had a chance to reject the services or the property and did not.
The Los Angeles Superior Court presides over the trial of this case. The judges of the Los Angeles Superior Court are you the students in the Business Law Class.