Properly formatted U.S. Court decision case review
Directions:
Your assignment is to conduct legal research to locate a U.S. domestic published appellate court decision concerning an aspect of U.S. healthcare and submit a written case review summary using the course Case Review Format provided below.
The aspect of healthcare and the specific case/decision is yours to decide. Case topics include, but are not limited to, litigation involving medical malpractice, Affordable Care Act, pharmaceutical liability, insurance company health care contracting, protecting patient information, etc. Choose a topic or issue of professional or personal interest to examine its “legal” perspective.
Please see attachments below.
You must find and use a copy of the court’s original full-length published decision. Accordingly, you may not use any secondary source such as an article, textbook, website, or other publication, blog discussion, etc. that discusses your case or provides a summary synopsis. You must, instead, locate and use the “original” published decision because the purpose of this exercise is to familiarize you with “where the law comes from” and expose you to the idiosyncratic format of how legal decisions are drafted and published – something distinctly different from other formats encountered in academia and society in general. By reading the full decision and summarizing it using the Case Review format, you will have a useful process and framework to feel comfortable and confident in your ability to locate, read, comprehend, summarize, and apply any reported “case law” on any topic and for any purpose.
For this assignment, restrict yourself to federal and state appellate court decisions (U.S. and state Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal) because these court decisions offer the complete picture and often provide precedent-setting decisions with significant impact on either the provision or enforcement of public health services and programs.
Anatomy of Published Legal Case
Citation: Name of the plaintiffs and defendants and where the case can be found, i.e. Chappel v.
Franklin Pierce School District, 426 P.2d 471 (Wash. 1967). Decided by the Supreme
Court of Washington, April 6, 1967.
Note: The names of the parties in the case are in italics.
“426” represents the volume number of the reporter
“471” represents the page number where the case begins
“P.2d” represents the Name of the Reporter, in this case the “Pacific Reporter, 2 nd
edition”
Resume of the Case: Action taken, relief sought, lower court’s findings, holdings of the present
court, and final action taken.
Headnotes: Key Numbers beside each headnote indicate subject or issue dealt with. There may
be from one to several headnotes that tell what the court decided. For example, Civil
Rights Key Note 3; Constitutional Law, 211; Constitutional Law 224 are sex
discrimination cases; Schools 172; et cetera.
Of Counsel: These are the attorneys of record for both sides.
Factual Materials: Following the list of attorneys of record, the court goes into the facts of the
case. Ordinarily, these are not at issue, since on appeal the question is whether some
error in law has occurred; that is, did the appellant receive a fair trial? Some facts are
important as to the resolution of the case, and some are not.
Note: In cases on appeal, the appellate court does not question the facts as determined
by the trial court below, it only searches for error in the law.
Name of Judge: The name of the judge who wrote the majority opinion appears at the beginning
of the factual material.
Members in Text: Each of the footnotes is then taken up by number and reasoning given. Match
each numbered portion of the text of the decision with its corresponding headnote.
Body of the Decision: There may be as many as 130 pages, but some cases are as short as
one or two pages.
Concurring Opinions: A majority judge gives his or her reasons for “concurring” with the
decision of the majority, which may be slightly different from those of the majority.
Dissenting Opinions: If any, these will tell why that particular judge was unable to concur in the
majority’s conclusion, and his or her reasons. Sometimes the dissents exceed the
majority’s opinions in length.
Finding of the Court: Affirmed, if considered an appeal, then the higher court agrees with the
lower court; reversed-the finding of the lower court is overturned; affirmed in part; reversed in
part; reversed and remanded for a new trial on the merits- higher court did not agree or disagree
but believed that the matter identified should be in the perview of the lower court to decide.
Examples on How to Cite the Law
U.S. Constitution
Example: Section 3 of the Twelfth Amendment – cite as “US Const. amend. XII, sec. 3”
Similar for individual state constitutions
Note: U.S. Constitution is always capitalized
Note: Same format for state constitutions
Laws (Statutes)
Federal Statutes
Example: U.S. Code Title 16, Section 1346 – cite as “16 U.S.C. § 1346”
Note: You will find the “§” in Word under Insert tab then Symbols
State Statutes
Example: Mass. Public Laws Title 14, Section 750 – cite as “14 Mass.Pub.L. § 750”
Note: Each state public law reporter will be different, and each reporter will provide the proper
way to cite the statutes; usually it is stated in the search results or provided by a secondary
source. If you cannot find the referenced citation format, then follow the above example.
Regulations
Federal Regulations
New Regulations are published in the Federal Register
Example: US EPA Regional Haze Rules at Fed. Reg. Vol. 64, No. 126, at page 35714 – cite as “40
Fed. R. 35714”
Federal regulations are later published in the Code of Federal Regulations
Example: US EPA Regional Haze Rules, Code of Federal Regulations, Vol. 40 at Parts 51 and 52 –
cite as 40 C.F.R. Parts 51 and 52
State Regulations
Note: These are recorded in separate state codes of regulations
Example: State Regulations
Virginia Administrative Code, Storage of Hazardous Materials, Volume 4, Section 25-4-2560 –
cite as “4 VAC 25-40-2560”
Local Regulations/Ordinances/Codes
Note: Follow the citation format provided in the published regulations, ordinances, codes, etc.
Example: City of Norfolk Food Code – cite as “Section 18.1.1 of the Norfolk City Code (2019)”
Court Cases
Federal Cases
Example: U.S. Supreme Court decision in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.,
found in U.S. Supreme Court Reporter, volume 467, page 837, decided in 1984 – cite as “Chevron U.S.A.,
Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984)”
For Federal Appeals Court decisions: Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001)
For Federal District Court decisions: City of Millville v. Rock, 683 F. Supp. 2d 319 (D.N.J. 2010)
State Cases
Note: Each state Supreme, Appellate, and District court decision will be published in separate state or
regional reporters. Follow the individual report’s direction for proper case citation format.
Example: State District Court decision
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision in Commonwealth v. Sheehy, found in
Massachusetts Reporter, volume 412, page 235, decided in 1992 – cite as “Com v. Sheehy, 412
Mass. 235 (1992)”
Case Review Format
Name: [your name]
Date: [submission date]
Case Review
I pledge that I have neither given nor received any aid on this work
A. Case Name: Full, proper case name citation (e.g., U.S. v. Smith, 423 U.S. 1256 (1980))
B. Court Hearing the Case: (e.g., U.S. Supreme Court)
C. Decision Date: (e.g., April 2, 2007)
D. Hearing Date: (e.g., June 26, 2006)
E. Case Type: (e.g., Civil or Criminal)
F. Facts: Concise statement of the relevant fact(s) – the who, what, when and where [note: this
section does not involve the speculative “why?”]. The key here is not all the facts; just the
relevant ones. So, do not merely recite all the facts because some, if not most, are likely not
relevant to your purpose. Instead, do the hard work to concisely summarize just the facts relevant
to a legal determination. (Example: Plaintiff alleged the defendant was speeding and ran a red
light at an intersection causing a collision with the plaintiff’s car with resulting personal injuries
to the plaintiff. Defendant alleged he was not speeding and attempted to cross the intersection
with a green light. Third-party witnesses stated . . .) Practice Tip: Read the entire decision first
and write your Fact(s) section last – after you understand the Issue, the Court’s determination of
the issue, and rationales supporting this determination
G. Legal Issue(s) before the Court: In every case the Court is asked to determine one or more
legal issues before it; otherwise there would be no original trial-level case decision before it.
Concisely state the legal issue(s) [Constitutional, statutory, regulatory, etc.] to be decided. For
example, did the Defendant breach a duty owed to the Plaintiff? Did the public health official
violate the plaintiff’s Constitutional rights? Practice Tip: Issue(s) should be stated in the form of
a question.
H. Applicable Rule(s) of Law: Provide the specific Constitutional provision, statute, law,
regulation, common law, rule, or legal principle applicable to the identified Legal Issue(s). For
example, if the Legal Issue is “Was the Defendant negligent in his actions towards the
Plaintiff?” the applicable Rule of Law would be the tort law of negligence – “Negligence is
defined as . . . and the four elements of negligence a Plaintiff must prove are . . .” Provide a Rule
of Law for each Legal Issue the Court identified.
1
I. Summary of the respective opposing parties’ positions: Provide a concise summary of the
respective opposing parties’ legal positions. (Example from above, Plaintiff alleged Defendant
was negligent in the operation of his motor vehicle. Defendant, denied any negligence or
wrongdoing but alleged Plaintiff was contributorily negligent.)
J. Court’s Legal Analysis: Briefly summarize how the court applied the specific Rule(s) of Law
to the Facts in order to access and answer the identified Legal Issue(s). For example, the Court
found the Government failed to adequately prove the third element of Conspiracy.
K. Court’s Decision/Finding(s): In other words, who won and why? Were damages ($)
awarded? Injunction granted/denied?
L. Dissenting Opinion(s): Briefly summarize, if any.
M. Impact of the decision: Address impact, if any, on environmental or public health law,
governance, justice, or policy affecting the provision of environmental health programs and/or
services.
N. Personal Opinion/Reaction: Your personal reaction to the opinion and its impacts as an
environmental health professional knowing what you know to date about environmental health
law, justice, and governance.
2
Sample Case Review
Name:
Date:
Case Review 1
I pledge that I have neither given nor received any aid on this work
A. Case Name: Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007)
B. Court Hearing the Case: U.S. Supreme Court
C. Decision Date: Monday, April 2, 2007
D. Hearing Date: Monday, June 26, 2006
E. Case Type: Civil
F. Facts
Massachusetts and other states decided to petition against the Environmental Protection Agency
to allow regulation of greenhouse gases. The effects of greenhouse gases are causing several environmental circumstances. Therefore, the accusation is based on the contribution of global
warming is caused by new motor vehicles. The state of Massachusetts used the federal Clean Air
Act to argue that the EPA should be required to regulate greenhouse gases. However, the EPA
states they are not authorized by the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Issue(s) Before the Court:
G. Legal Issue(s) before the Court:
Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency was bought before the court to answer:
“May the EPA decline to issue emission standards for motor vehicles based on policy
considerations not enumerated in the Clean Air Act?”
“Does the Clean Air Act give the EPA authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other
greenhouse gases?” (Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 2006)
Legal Provision: Article 3, Section 2, Paragraph 1: Case or Controversy Requirement
H. Applicable Rule(s) of Law: federal Clean Air Act
I. Summary of the respective opposing parties’ positions
A. The EPA argues the research from scientists were unreasonable evidence in support of
Massachusetts suit. In addition, the EPA’s argument is supported by the National Research Council’s research by stating, “there are no justifiable connection between the
greenhouse gases and global warming that can be established”. Furthermore, the EPA has
no noticeable obligation to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act.
B. The state of Massachusetts argument is based upon the Bush Administration decision to
take more initial steps to combat global warming. Massachusetts accusations are supported by scientific observations about current environmental changes. In addition, two conclusions were used during the argument to support the suit. Firstly, the Clean Air Act specifically supports the regulation of greenhouse gases. Secondly, regulation should be inplace if there is a negative effect to the environment. Therefore, it shows that the Environmental Protection Agency should be helping to reduce the greenhouse gases regardless
if the Clean Air Act stated they should regulate.
J. Court’s Legal Analysis
The court rejected the EPA’s claim of not being responsible for the accumulation of environmentally hazardous gases emitted by new modeled vehicles.
K. Court’s Decision/Finding(s)
The decision of the court case was five (5) votes for Massachusetts, while four (4) votes
against.
L. Dissenting Opinion(s):
Chief Justice John Roberts’s dissenting opinion argued that the state of Massachusetts
should not be standing for suit. Chief Justice Roberts states that the potential hazards of
global warming was not plausible according to the state’s allegations. In addition, Chief
Justice Antonin Scalia’s dissenting argument established that the Clean Air Act was proposed to encounter conventional atmosphere pollutants. Furthermore, Scalia’s argument
clearly states that the Clean Air Act was not intended to conquer global climate change issues.
2
M. Impact of the Decision:
The decision from the Massachusetts vs. EPA became the most important environmental
court cases in history. The impact of the court case caused future course of environmental
regulation in the United States by yielding the EPA’s agreement and proper understanding
of the Clean Air Act. Furthermore, the EPA’s argument about the regulation of the Clean
Air Act was rejected. Therefore, the EPA is responsible for any environmental hazards
that can cause potential harm.
L. Personal Opinion/Reaction:
My personal reaction from the court decision was not surprising. I do believe that the EPA
should be responsible for the emissions given off by vehicles. In addition, I support the
state for taking a major step to change the environmental health arena. Also, I think that
the State of Massachusetts used very good evidence to support their claims. I do not support the claims that the EPA used. I feel that they are neglecting their overall reason for
protecting the environment. Overall, I think the court decision was a fair.
3
How to Locate Free Case Law on the Internet
February 25, 2013 by Robert Brammer
This post was coauthored by Barbara Bavis.
One of the defining features of the common law system is the emphasis placed on the
precedential value of case law. Until recently, case law has not been widely available on the
Internet, leaving researchers with no choice but to seek out print reporters and commercial
electronic databases to locate cases of interest. This situation has started to change, however, and
now researchers have several free, online databases at their disposal. These resources do not
replace the use of commercial print and electronic resources, since they are often limited in
coverage, do not provide a digest, and do not contain a quick and effective citator, but
researchers’ use of free online materials as a starting point can save them time and money. For
example, researchers might use these resources to locate cases of interest, write down the
citations to these cases, and then take them to a public law library to Shepardize them [to ensure
they are current law].
There are several freely-available options for tracking down electronic case law. Some of the
most prominent of these are listed below:
Google Scholar offers an extensive database of state and federal cases. Click on the link, select
the “legal documents” button, and choose your search terms. You may click on the downwardpointing arrow in the search box to pull up an advanced search that will let you search for a
phrase, exclude results with certain terms, etc. You may also search by entering a citation to a
case in the search box. After you execute your search, you may use the facets on the left-hand
side to narrow your results. One of the most useful facets allows you to narrow by jurisdiction.
Select a jurisdiction by clicking “select courts” and then place a check mark next to the courts
you would like to search.
FindLaw offers a database of case law from the U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Circuit Courts of
Appeal, as well as several state supreme courts. First, click on the “Advanced Search” link
found under the “Search for a Case” tab on the left-hand side of the page. Use the drop-down
menus to select a court, legal topic, and/or industry. You may also search by date, docket
number, and party name. FindLaw also offers a tab where you may perform a full-text search.
Continuing down the screen, you may also choose to browse by selecting a court, company, or
legal topic. Once you arrive at a result in FindLaw, you will be brought to a screen showing a
summary of the case. At the top, right-hand side of the page, you will be able to click “Read” to
gain full-text access to the case.
Justia offers cases from the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, and U.S. District
Courts. Additionally, you may find links to many state supreme court and intermediate court of
appeal cases. To locate a case of interest, enter a keyword into the search box and use the dropdown menu to choose a jurisdiction, or simply click on a hyperlinked jurisdiction, choose a court
and date, and then browse through a list of cases.
The Public Library of Law (PLOL) offers cases from the U.S. Supreme Court (1754-present),
U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal (generally 1951-present, with a few exceptions), and state cases
(1997-present). You can perform a keyword search of all the resources via the search box on the
front page, or limit your search by selecting the “Advanced Options” link underneath the search
box. The Advanced Options search allows you to limit by court and by date. In addition, the
PLOL provides a “finding a case” tutorial for visitors, linked on the homepage. Users are
required, however, to sign up for a free account in order to see their results. After using these
resources, if you have any questions, or would like to use a citator to update the cases you have
found, feel free to visit the Law Library of Congress or your local public library.
Also, Ms. Joleen McGinnis at the ODU library is available to assist you with your research. Do
not forget you also have a writing lab at the ODU college campus (Norfolk). I would recommend
that you schedule an appointment and arrive with a copy of the assignment and your written
draft.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
