Find a litigated case (business law topic, any time period) and prepare a case brief in the format shown below
CASE BRIEF
Using the website below, find any state or federal CASE that involves a Corporate controversy (shareholders, corporations, employment laws, intellectual property, fraud, derivative suits, antitrust, financial misrepresentation, mergers, virtually anything that is a case against or by a Corporation).
Read the case, and type summaries of each of the following sections:
NAME OF CASE & COURT (Use citations with the case name i.e., 253 SC 34)
FACTS
ISSUE
DECISION (In favor of Plaintiff/Defendant, Appeal Upheld/Overturned)
HOLDING (Reason that the Judges ruled for that party)
Note: Please be concise and simplify into one or two paragraphs for each section.
REFERENCE:
Some websites can be found by searching topics from the syllabus for class and the court (i.e. Supreme Court). Or you can look in law journals or law review articles published by law schools. Many law schools (Cornell, Rutgers) are good sites to look for published cases.
**UPLOAD CASE BRIEF WITH LINK TO THE CASE IN THE DOCUMENT.**
– Find any case (LITIGATED FULL CASE, NOT SUMMARY)
Requirements: 1-2 paragraphs for each section
Answer preview
The reason held by the district court judges for dismissing the grower’s motion is that the public access was not continuous and permanent. The Ninth Circuit upholds the decision made by the lower District court because although the access regulation invaded the grower’s property, it does not grant access permanently and continuously. Also, the lower court’s ruling was upheld because the access regulation did not enable random public members to access the growers’ property unpredictably. Further, the access cannot constitute a per se taking since the access was short of 365 days per year (Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, 2021). The decisions made by the Ninth Circuit recognized that the government could not undertake physical taking by physically accessing a property without a court order.
