Case Briefing in Business Law: Reading Court Opinions

This document provides a comprehensive guide to case briefing, a crucial skill for understanding business law. It explains the importance of case law and judicial opinions. The guide outlines the standard components of a case brief: case name and citation, facts, issue, ruling, and reasons. Each section is clearly defined with examples. The document includes a sample case brief of Morse v. Frederick, demonstrating how to organize information and extract key legal concepts. This guide equips students with the tools to efficiently analyze and understand court cases, enhancing their ability to study and reference legal precedents. This valuable resource is available on Desklib, a platform providing AI-based study tools and past papers for students.

How to Brief a Case
Business law is not simply rules and regulations passed by federal and state
organizations and legislatures. Business law also includes case law created when courts
rule on various legal issues. Accordingly, being able to read and understand judicial
opinions is critical to obtaining a robust understanding of business law. One method for
understanding court cases and saving time is known as “briefing.” To brief a case, one
must read the case thoroughly, taking in the main points, then write up a short synopsis of
the case. A standard brief contains information from the case organized in the following
manner: (1) case name and citation; (2) facts; (3) issue; (4) ruling; and (5) reasons. By
organizing case information according to the five categories just listed, one can create a
short guide to any case that contains all of the relevant information to aid in
understanding the case, as well as create a tool for later references to the case without
having to reread the case every time.
The following is a quick description of what information is typically included in
each of the five areas of a standard brief.
1. Case name and citation. This information is used to identify the case. Under this
heading the case name, the court making the decision, the year the decision was made,
and the citations for the case should all be included.
2. Facts. The facts section is used to provide the relevant background information
from the case to facilitate a full understanding of what lead to the case. The facts
section should include: (a) relevant background information; (b) the arguments made by
the plaintiff(s) and defendant(s); (c) any decisions made by lower courts.
3. Issue. The issue, or issues, is the question, or questions, the court has been asked to
address in hearing the case. As such, the issue should be phrased as a question and
should pertain to the legal matter at the heart of the case.
4. Ruling. The ruling refers to how the court answered the question identified as the
issue. A simple yes or no will NOT suffice to answer the issue question. You must
answer your legal issue with a yes or no followed by a complete sentence to answer
the question clearly.
5. Reasons. The reasons section elaborates upon why the court made the ruling that it
did regarding the issue. To be helpful, the ruling section should contain what are the
substantive legal reasons given for why the court ruled the way that it did.
The following is an example of a case brief to demonstrate what is typically included
in a brief.

Morse v. Frederick
Supreme Court of the United States, 2007.
127 S.Ct. 2618,
168 L.Ed.2d. 290.
Facts: Morse, the principal of a high school in Alaska, allowed the students to stand
outside the school to watch as the Olympic torch was carried past the high school in
2002. At this school-sanctioned and school-supervised event, several students held up a
banner containing the phrase, “BONG HiTS 4 JESUS.” Morse, thinking the banner
advocated illegal drug use, following school policy against messages that are pro-drug
use, told the students to take the banner down. Frederick, one of the students with the
banner, refused, and was subsequently suspended. The superintendent and the school
board both supported the principal’s actions. Frederick sued Morse, arguing Morse
violated Frederick’s First Amendment right to free speech. The District Court ruled in
favor of Morse, saying no First Amendment violation occurred. Frederick appealed and
the Ninth Circuit reversed the decision. The Ninth Circuit agreed that the activity was
school-authorized and that the message was pro-marijuana use. However, the Ninth
Circuit argued that the school did not demonstrate that Frederick’s speech threatened a
substantial disruption, and thus his First Amendment right was violated. Morse then
appealed to the Supreme Court.
Issue: Did Morse’s actions requiring Frederick to take down the banner and then
suspending Frederick for his refusal violate Frederick’s First Amendment right to free
speech?
Ruling: No, Frederick’s First Amendment right to free speech was not violated. The
Ninth Circuit’s opinion was reversed and remanded in favor of Morse.
Reasons: The Supreme Court reasoned that Frederick’s speech is properly understood as
school speech, as it was at a school-sanctioned event, during school hours, on and
immediately off school property. As a school speech case, the school is allowed to limit
speech in ways they could not were it not a school event, which limits Frederick’s speech
rights preventing his unfurling of a banner supporting drug use in blatant violation of
school policy. The pro-drug message was clear, and no reasonable interpretation exists
for what the banner meant other than support illegal drug use. The pro-drug message,
which was against school policy was not required by Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503,
to involve a substantial disruption, as was argued in Bethel School Dist. No 403 v. Fraser,
478 U.S. 675. Furthermore, in accordance with the importance of preventing school aged
children from engaging in illegal substance use, the school was well within its power to
suspend Frederick for promoting drug use via his banner. The right to free speech is not
lost when children enter school, but the nature of permissible speech, per the ruling in
Fraser, changes.