Case Brief

Case Brief

PA 205: Introduction to Legal Analysis and Writing

April Paxton

August 9, 2011

The following are to case briefs in which I used the FIRAC method to break them down. I will be analyzing Donnelly v. Rees and Guidici v. Guididci. Both cases were held by the Supreme Court of California.

Donnelly v. Rees, 141 Cal. 56 (1903)

I. Facts: Winifred Donnelly, the sole heir of Patrick Kean, brought suit against Rees and O’Brien to set aside a fraudulently obtained deed. Patrick Kean was the owner of the half interest in the mines, valued at $10,000. On November 15, 1897 the defendants fraudulently procured from him, the deed. Kean was in a condition to such an extent as to render him unfit to transact business or understand the said transaction. It was stated that for more than five years before the transaction, Kean was a habitual drinker, which was injurious to his mind. This made him easy prey to the defendants. The Superior Court of San Bernardino County found in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants appealed the decision.

II. Issue: Did the defendants use fraudulent practices and undue influence to procure the deed?

III. Rule: The rule that the court applied was Cal. Civ. Code § 2224: California Codes- Section 2224 states that, One who gains a thing by fraud, accident, mistake, undue influence, the violation of trust or other wrongful act, is, unless he or she has some other better right to, an involuntary trustee of the thing gained, for the benefit of the person who would have otherwise had it.

IV. Analysis: The court had to analyze the facts to conclude whether Mr. Kean was of sound mind or not when the business transaction took place. It is known that Mr. Kean had been heavily drinking for the previous five years before the transaction took place. There was testimony that Kean had been drinking during the transaction. Carroll also stated that once the deal had been executed, the defendants laughed. “They said that was the...