Tarasoff vs regents of the university of california

Brief the case Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, law homework help
Subject
Business Finance

Question Description
INSTRUCTIONS:

Brief the case Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California, 17 Cal. 3d 425, 555 P.2d 334, 131 Cal. Rptr. 14 (1976), using F+IRAC. The case appears on Pate 133 of your text, or you may find it in LexisNexis or the Virtual Library. You will find a refresher about F+IRAC and case briefing, along with a sample case brief. ATTACHED is a sampleUsing F+IRAC to Brief Legal Cases 1. F(acts)—what happened to get the parties into court a. Read the case, making sure to read every word. b. Decide which area of law the fact pattern suggests. In other words, does it apply to contracts, real property, bankruptcy, or other area of law? If there is more than one area of law addressed in the case, choose the area of law of the class in which the assignment was made. c. Read the fact pattern again, making notes about the facts that are important to the area of law that you chose. For example, if Constitutional Law is the area of law you chose, make notes on the facts that impact the constitutional questions. d. Write the fact pattern as succinctly as possible. Remember that a case brief is BRIEF. e. At the end of your fact pattern, be sure to include the decision of the lower court. 2. I(ssue)—the question or questions the court has been asked to address a. Begin phrasing the issue by referring to the area of law. For example, if the area of law is Constitutional Law, the issue should begin with language similar to the following: Under the Establishment Clause, does…(notice the “question” word—others are can, will, should, and so on). Whether, under the Establishment Clause, a person can…(notice the “question” word). b. Phrase the issue so that the reader can understand the question before the court without reading the fact pattern. c. Do not make reference to specific names of parties when forming the issue. The issue is the general question of law the court will answer. 3. R(ule)—the court’s answer to the question raised by the issue a. The court’s answer will also be general and apply to everyone. Do not make reference to specific parties in the rule of law. b. If there is more than one rule, and there usually is, choose only the decisions of the court that answer the issue and apply to the area of law you are studying. 4. A(nalysis)—why the court ruled the way it did and how the court applied the rule of law to the facts. a. To begin your analysis, list each element of the rule(s) of law you are addressing on a sheet of paper. Break the rule down into each element in its simplest form. Read the rule again to be sure you missed no element. Next to each element, list the fact that corresponds to the element. Read the element and the fact and determine if the fact satisfies the element (Yes), does not satisfy the element (No), or it is not certain whether the fact satisfies the element (Maybe). Write your answer (Yes, No, Maybe) in a column next to the fact. b. When you have completed your analysis chart, begin writing your analysis in narrative form. The first sentence should refer to the rule of law and should be taken directly from your analysis chart. For example, “In order for a contract to exist, the following elements must be present: (and then list the elements).” c. The next sentences of your analysis should apply the specific facts to each element from your analysis chart. An example of the second sentence could be, “In this case, elements a, b, and c have not been established.” Then continue by applying each fact to the corresponding element to show why the element (in this example) is not met. 5. C(onclusion)—a BRIEF summary, including the decision of this court a. The first sentence of the conclusion makes reference to the rule of law, briefly (example below). b. Then, briefly state the issue (example below).