Ad
related to: sample case briefs for paralegals in california template excel word
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A very brief (one or two sentence) description of what the central ruling of the case was. This may or may not be fact specific, depending on how broadly the court's opinion was worded; follow with a short statement of what the specific outcome of the case was (e.g., "Appellate Division affirmed").
[[Category:California templates]] to the <includeonly> section at the bottom of that page. Otherwise, add <noinclude>[[Category:California templates]]</noinclude> to the end of the template code, making sure it starts on the same line as the code's last character.
Case opinions: opinions: A very brief summary of the major findings or holdings in the case. Many case reports will have headnotes or summaries of the holdings that can be modified and entered into this field. String: optional: Judge(s) judge judges Membership: Judge(s) sitting on the case, in order of precedence. Wikilink names where articles ...
The table of authorities, often called a TOA, is frequently a legal requirement for litigation briefs; the various state courts have different rules as to what kinds of briefs require a TOA. The TOA list has the name of the authority followed by the page number or numbers on which each authority appears, and the authorities are commonly listed ...
The formation of each case brief follows the same pattern: Facts, Issue, Rule, Analysis, Impact. A case brief may also include a dissent or concurrence if there is either in the particular case. The facts should include the important information from the case, and should also include the procedural history before it makes it to the supreme court.
For example, an appellate brief to the highest court in a jurisdiction calls for a formal style—this shows proper respect for the court and for the legal matter at issue. An interoffice legal memorandum to a supervisor can probably be less formal—though not colloquial—because it is an in-house decision-making tool, not a court document.
In 2002, the California Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) started the Second-Generation Electronic Filing Specification (2GEFS) project. [5]After a $200,000 consultant's report declared the project ready for a final push, the Judicial Council of California scrapped the program in 2012 after $500 million in costs.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Donate