Skip to main content

Study

Case Brief Template

A case brief is one page of your own notes on a judicial opinion: who sued whom, what the court was asked, the rule it applied, what it held and why. Copy the template, then compare it with the sample brief closest to your course.

Updated 2026-10-27

Copy and adapt

The template

Case briefTemplate

[Case name], [citation]

Court and year: [Court], [year] Opinion by: [Judge or Justice]. Vote: [e.g. 5-4] Course: [Course], casebook p. [#]. Briefed: {{date}} Topic: [[Course outline section]]

Parties

  • [Plaintiff or petitioner]: [who they are, in a few words]
  • [Defendant or respondent]: [who they are]

Procedural history

[What happened below: trial result, appeal, how the case reached this court.]

Facts

  • [Only the facts the court relied on. Use names, not just P and D.]

Issue

[A legal question the court must answer, phrased for a yes or no answer. One line per issue.]

Rule

[The legal principle the court applies or announces, stated so it would apply to other facts.]

Holding

[Yes or no, then one sentence that answers the issue on these facts.]

Reasoning

  1. [Step in the court's argument]
  2. [Precedent, text, history or policy it relied on]
  3. [How it dealt with the other side's best argument]

Concurrences and dissents

  • [Justice, concurring or dissenting]: [main point, and why it matters]

Disposition

[Affirmed / reversed / remanded / vacated]

Notes for class

  • [Why this case is in the casebook]
  • [Question I expect to be asked, or want to ask]

5 examples

Examples for different situations

The same structure, filled in for the situations people actually bring to it. Copy the one closest to yours.

1.Constitutional law: a case with three issues

When it fits: Use this in the first weeks of Con Law, when the opinion answers several questions in a row and the one your professor cares about comes last.

Constitutional law: a case with three issuesExample 1

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)

Court and year: US Supreme Court, 1803 Opinion by: Chief Justice Marshall. Vote: unanimous (Cushing and Moore did not participate) Course: Constitutional Law I, casebook p. 2. Briefed: 2026-08-24 Topic: [[Con Law outline: judicial review]]

Parties

  • William Marbury: appointed justice of the peace for the District of Columbia in the last days of the Adams administration.
  • James Madison: Secretary of State under President Jefferson.

Procedural history

Marbury filed directly in the Supreme Court, asking for a writ of mandamus ordering Madison to deliver his commission. He relied on Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789.

Facts

  • Adams nominated Marbury, the Senate confirmed him, and his commission was signed and sealed before Adams left office.
  • The commission was not delivered in time. Jefferson's administration, through Madison, refused to deliver it.

Issue

  1. Does Marbury have a right to the commission?
  2. If so, do the laws give him a remedy?
  3. If so, can the Supreme Court issue that remedy here, in its original jurisdiction?

Rule

The Constitution is superior law. An act of Congress that conflicts with it is void, and the courts must decide which applies.

Holding

  1. Yes: the appointment was complete once the commission was signed and sealed.
  2. Yes: mandamus is the proper remedy for a legal right withheld by an official.
  3. No: Section 13, read to give the Court original jurisdiction over this case, adds to Article III's list and is unconstitutional.

Reasoning

  1. Article III lists the cases in the Court's original jurisdiction. Congress cannot add to that list.
  2. A written constitution that limits government only works if a law contrary to it is not enforced.
  3. Judges swear to support the Constitution, so applying a law that conflicts with it would violate that oath. It is the duty of the courts to "say what the law is."

Concurrences and dissents

  • None.

Disposition

Writ not issued. Marbury loses.

Notes for class

  • Why it is here: establishes judicial review of federal statutes. Issues 1 and 2 are mostly background.
  • Marshall wins the power by denying the remedy, so there was no order for Jefferson to defy.
  • Ask: Marshall was the Secretary of State who failed to deliver the commission. Should he have heard the case?

2.Civil procedure: the test you will apply all semester

When it fits: Use this when the case announces a test that every later case in the unit applies, and the cold call will ask you to state it precisely and apply it to new facts.

Civil procedure: the test you will apply all semesterExample 2

International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945)

Court and year: US Supreme Court, 1945 Opinion by: Chief Justice Stone. Vote: 8-0 (Black concurring; Jackson did not participate) Course: Civil Procedure, casebook p. 148. Briefed: 2026-09-15 Topic: [[Civ Pro outline: personal jurisdiction]]

Parties

  • State of Washington, collecting unemployment fund contributions.
  • International Shoe Co.: Delaware corporation, principal place of business in St. Louis, Missouri.

Procedural history

Washington assessed unpaid contributions. The company appeared specially to argue it was not subject to Washington's jurisdiction. The state's administrative tribunal, superior court and Supreme Court all ruled for Washington. The company appealed.

Facts

  • The company had no office in Washington and made no contracts there.
  • It employed 11 to 13 salesmen who lived in Washington, showed samples and sent orders to St. Louis for acceptance.
  • Notice was served on one salesman in Washington and mailed to the St. Louis office.

Issue

Does due process allow Washington to exercise jurisdiction over a corporation whose only presence is a sales force soliciting orders in the state?

Rule

A state may exercise personal jurisdiction over a defendant not present in the state if the defendant has "minimum contacts" with it, such that the suit does not offend "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice."

Holding

Yes. The company's activities in Washington were systematic and continuous, and the obligation sued on arose from those activities.

Reasoning

  1. Pennoyer's physical presence idea does not fit corporations, which act only through agents.
  2. The question is the quality and nature of the activity, not a mechanical count of contacts.
  3. A company that enjoys the benefits and protection of a state's laws can fairly be asked to answer for obligations that arise from that activity.

Concurrences and dissents

  • Black, concurring: agrees with the result but objects to "fair play" as a standard; it lets judges limit state power by their own sense of fairness.

Disposition

Affirmed.

Notes for class

  • Two parts to apply: contacts (purposeful, systematic) and fairness. Later cases split them; keep them separate in the outline.
  • Prof. Castellanos will change the facts. Practice: one salesman, one visit, one sale. Same answer?

3.Criminal procedure: a 5-4 decision where the dissents matter

When it fits: Use this when the vote was close, the dissents predicted problems that later cases took up, and your professor grades whether you can argue both sides.

Criminal procedure: a 5-4 decision where the dissents matterExample 3

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

Court and year: US Supreme Court, 1966 Opinion by: Chief Justice Warren. Vote: 5-4 Course: Criminal Procedure, casebook p. 611. Briefed: 2026-10-05 Topic: [[Crim Pro outline: interrogation]]

Parties

  • Ernesto Miranda: arrested in Phoenix in 1963.
  • State of Arizona.

Procedural history

Miranda was convicted of kidnapping and rape, and the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed. The Supreme Court heard the case with three others raising the same question (Vignera, Westover, Stewart).

Facts

  • Police arrested Miranda, took him to a station and questioned him for about two hours.
  • He signed a written confession. The form stated he understood his rights, but no one told him he could remain silent or have a lawyer.
  • The confession was used at trial.

Issue

Can the prosecution use statements obtained through custodial interrogation when the suspect was not informed of his rights?

Rule

Before custodial interrogation, a suspect must be warned that he has the right to remain silent, that anything he says can be used against him, that he has the right to a lawyer, and that one will be appointed if he cannot afford one. Statements taken without the warnings and a valid waiver are inadmissible.

Holding

No. Miranda's confession was inadmissible because he was not warned and did not waive his rights.

Reasoning

  1. The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination applies in the police station, not only in court.
  2. Custodial interrogation is inherently coercive; police manuals of the time show how isolation and pressure are used to get statements.
  3. Without clear warnings, courts cannot tell afterwards whether a confession was voluntary.

Concurrences and dissents

  • Clark, concurring in part and dissenting in part: would keep the totality-of-circumstances test for voluntariness.
  • Harlan, dissenting (with Stewart and White): the rules are new, not required by the Fifth Amendment, and will hamper legitimate questioning.
  • White, dissenting (with Harlan and Stewart): the privilege's text and history do not support the rule, and it will cost convictions in serious cases.

Disposition

Reversed.

Notes for class

  • Miranda was retried without the confession and convicted again. Useful for the "does the rule free the guilty?" debate.
  • Know the two triggers: custody and interrogation. Most exam fact patterns turn on one of them.

4.Constitutional law: overruling a precedent, remedy deferred

When it fits: Use this when the case rejects an earlier decision, the holding is famous but the remedy came a year later, and you need to keep the two apart.

Constitutional law: overruling a precedent, remedy deferredExample 4

Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 (1954)

Court and year: US Supreme Court, 1954 Opinion by: Chief Justice Warren. Vote: 9-0 Course: Constitutional Law II, casebook p. 487. Briefed: 2026-10-19 Topic: [[Con Law outline: equal protection, race]]

Parties

  • Black schoolchildren (through their parents) in Kansas, South Carolina, Virginia and Delaware. The case takes its name from Oliver Brown of Topeka.
  • Local school boards and officials.

Procedural history

Four cases were consolidated. In three, lower federal courts denied relief under the separate but equal doctrine. In Delaware, the state supreme court ordered admission because the Black schools were unequal. The Court heard argument in 1952 and reargument in 1953.

Facts

  • State laws required or permitted racially separate public schools.
  • In several cases, the Black and white schools were equal or being equalized in buildings, teachers and curricula.

Issue

Does segregating children in public schools solely by race deny the minority children equal protection, even if the physical facilities and other tangible factors are equal?

Rule

In public education, the doctrine of separate but equal has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.

Holding

Yes. Segregation in public education by race violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Reasoning

  1. The history of the Fourteenth Amendment is inconclusive on schools, so the Court looks at education as it is now.
  2. Education is now the most important function of state and local governments and a foundation of citizenship.
  3. Segregation itself generates a feeling of inferiority in Black children that affects their motivation and learning. The Court cites psychological studies in its footnote 11.
  4. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) is rejected to the extent it conflicts with this finding.

Concurrences and dissents

  • None. The unanimous opinion was itself part of the strategy.

Disposition

Cases restored to the docket for further argument on the remedy.

Notes for class

  • Remedy came in Brown II, 349 U.S. 294 (1955): desegregate "with all deliberate speed." Keep the two decisions in separate outline entries.
  • The companion D.C. case (Bolling v. Sharpe) was decided the same day under the Fifth Amendment. Check whether it is assigned.

5.Five-minute brief for exam review

When it fits: Use this late in the semester when you already understand the case from class and only need a compressed brief to feed your outline, not a full write-up.

Five-minute brief for exam reviewExample 5

Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963)

Court and year: US Supreme Court, 1963 Opinion by: Justice Black. Vote: 9-0 Course: Criminal Procedure review, casebook p. 74. Briefed: 2026-12-01 Topic: [[Crim Pro outline: right to counsel]]

Facts

  • Clarence Earl Gideon was charged in Florida with breaking and entering a pool hall with intent to commit petty larceny, a felony.
  • He asked for a lawyer. Florida appointed counsel only in capital cases, so the judge refused.
  • He defended himself, was convicted and got five years. He then petitioned the Supreme Court by hand from prison.

Issue

Does the Fourteenth Amendment require states to appoint counsel for felony defendants who cannot afford one?

Rule

The Sixth Amendment right to counsel is fundamental and applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Holding

Yes. Betts v. Brady (1942) is overruled.

Reasoning

  1. Governments hire lawyers to prosecute and defendants with money hire lawyers to defend. That is strong evidence lawyers are necessities, not luxuries.
  2. Betts departed from earlier cases that treated counsel as fundamental.

Concurrences and dissents

  • Douglas, Clark and Harlan concurred separately. Harlan agreed Betts should go but disputed that it had broken with earlier cases; in his view it deserved a more respectful burial.

Disposition

Reversed and remanded.

Notes for class

  • On retrial with a lawyer, Gideon was acquitted.
  • Outline link: incorporation. Gideon is the example for a right held fundamental and applied to the states.

What goes in a case brief

A case brief template is a checklist for reading an opinion actively. The core is five parts that every guide agrees on, and the rest earns its place in class.

  • Heading. Case name, citation, court, year, author and vote. The vote tells you whether a dissent might matter later.
  • Facts. Only the ones the court relied on. If a fact does not appear in the reasoning, it probably does not belong.
  • Procedural history. Who won below and how the case got here. Professors ask this more than students expect.
  • Issue. A legal question that can be answered yes or no. Several issues get several lines, as in Marbury.
  • Rule. The principle, stated generally enough to apply to other facts.
  • Holding. The answer to the issue on these facts.
  • Reasoning. The steps that get from rule to holding, including how the court handled the losing side's best argument.
  • Separate opinions. One or two lines each.
  • Disposition. Affirmed, reversed, remanded. One word, and it is often the cold call's first question.

How to brief a case

  1. Read the casebook heading first. It tells you why the case was assigned.
  2. Read the opinion through once without writing. Find who won and what question decided it.
  3. Read again and mark. Facts in one color, rule and holding in another, reasoning in a third. This is book briefing, and on its own it is enough for routine cases later in the semester.
  4. Write the brief in your own words. If you are copying sentences, you have not understood the paragraph yet.
  5. After class, add Notes for class. What the professor emphasized, the hypothetical they used, the question that stumped the room.

From briefs to an outline

The unanswered question in most case brief guides is what happens to the briefs afterwards. The answer is the outline. Each brief's rule and the class notes become one entry under a topic heading; the facts shrink to a line you can use as an example. If every brief already links to its outline section, outlining at the end of the semester is collecting, not rereading. Start the outline in week four, not week twelve, and add each unit as you finish it.

Common mistakes

  • Rewriting the opinion. A three-page brief is a sign you have not separated the rule from the reasoning.
  • Writing the issue as a topic. "Equal protection" cannot be answered. "Does segregation by race deny equal protection even if facilities are equal?" can.
  • Copying the holding verbatim. Fine for the one famous line; for the rest, paraphrase.
  • Skipping procedural history. "Who appealed?" is a standard first question, and without it reversed and affirmed mean nothing.
  • Ignoring separate opinions. In close cases, the dissent is the other half of your exam answer.

When to use a different template

For notes during the lecture itself, use the lecture notes template or the Cornell notes template, which leaves a column for questions to review later. To plan reading assignments and outline deadlines across a semester, the study planner template is the better fit.

Customization tips

  • Brief to the casebook heading

    Before reading, look at the chapter and section title the case sits under. That tells you which issue the professor assigned it for, and which parts of a long opinion you can skim.

  • Write the issue as a yes or no question

    "Personal jurisdiction" is a topic, not an issue. "Can Washington sue a company whose only presence is a sales force?" can be answered, and the holding is then one word plus a sentence.

  • Use names, not P and D

    On appeal, plaintiffs become appellees or respondents and the labels flip. Names stay put and are what your professor will use in the cold call.

  • Keep dissents short but never skip them

    Two lines per separate opinion: the main point and why it matters. Dissents are where exam counterarguments come from, and some of them become later majorities.

  • Add a Notes for class section

    Write the question you expect to be asked and the question you want to ask. After class, add what the professor emphasized. That line is what goes into your outline.

  • Shrink the template after week six

    Once you can read opinions quickly, drop Parties and Procedural history for most cases and brief in five minutes, as in the Gideon example. Keep the full template for cases that anchor a unit.

In the app

How to do this in Scribelet

  1. Open Desk Settings, then Templates, tap Add Template, paste the template above and set the category to General with a default tag for the course, such as #civpro. Every brief then starts dated and tagged.

  2. Link each brief to its outline section with [[Civ Pro outline: personal jurisdiction]]. The outline note's backlinks panel lists every case briefed under that topic, in one place, when you sit down to outline.

  3. Link cases to each other: write [[Pennoyer v. Neff]] in the International Shoe brief and the older case shows the newer one in its backlinks, which is how a doctrine's line of cases becomes visible.

  4. Before an exam, ask the AI chat "which of my briefs involve a dissent about incorporation?" It answers from your own briefs with citations to the notes.

  5. Record a voice note after class with what the professor stressed. Scribelet transcribes it and structures it into a note you can link to the brief.

Templates, template variables and AI generation are documented in Note templates.

Frequently asked questions

What is the format of a case brief?

A heading with the case name, citation, court and year, then facts, procedural history, issue, rule, holding, reasoning, separate opinions and disposition. Formats vary by professor; some fold procedural history into facts, some add a Notes section. Keep the order consistent so you can find the holding in five seconds during a cold call.

What are the five parts of a case brief?

The core five are facts, issue, rule, holding and reasoning. Most templates, including this one, add the citation heading, procedural history, concurrences and dissents, and disposition, which is why you will also see lists of seven or ten parts. Those extras take a minute each and save you when the professor asks how the case got to the court.

What is the best way to brief a case?

Read the opinion once without writing, to find the issue and the outcome. Read it again and mark facts, rule and reasoning. Then write the brief in your own words, without copying sentences from the opinion. Paraphrasing is what makes you understand it, and it is what you will need on an exam.

How long should a case brief be?

One page, or about 300 to 600 words. A brief longer than that is usually a rewrite of the opinion. Guides suggest roughly five minutes for a simple case and 10 to 15 for a hard one once you have practiced; in the first weeks, expect much longer.

Do I have to brief every case?

No. Briefing is a study method, not a requirement. Most 1Ls brief everything in the first months, then switch to book briefing (highlighting and margin notes) for routine cases and full briefs for the cases that anchor a unit. Commercial briefs are useful to check your work, not to replace it.

Briefs that are already half an outline

Save this case brief template in Scribelet, link every brief to its outline section and to the cases it builds on, and ask your notes which cases share a rule before the exam. Encrypted, free to start.

Start briefing in Scribelet
or get the app
Download on theApp Store

Free plan, no credit card. See pricing

Study

Class Notes Template

One note per class session, linked to one note per course. The template captures what the lecture was trying to answer, the key points in your words, the questions you still have, and what is due next. Copy it, or start from the example closest to your class.

Study

Cornell Notes Template

Cornell notes split a page into three jobs: notes during class, cue questions afterwards, and a short summary at the bottom. This version is plain Markdown, so the cues sit above each section of notes instead of in a margin. Copy it, or start from the example closest to your class.

Study

Study Planner Template

A study planner has two parts: a map of everything due this term, and a short list of what you will actually do this week. This template keeps both in one note, with an assignment tracker, exam dates, weekly sessions and a Sunday check-in. Copy it, or start from the example closest to your term.

Guide

Best Note-Taking App for Students: Setup, Templates and a Weekly Routine

The app matters less than the system. This page tells you which app fits which kind of student in one honest section, then spends the rest on the setup and the weekly routine that keep lecture notes, readings and lab work usable by exam week.

Guide

Knowledge Management for Lawyers: A Personal System for Solo Practice, Small Firms and Law School

Most writing on legal knowledge management assumes a firm with a KM team and a budget. This page is for the lawyer who has neither: a personal system for know-how notes, matter close-outs and case briefs, which tool fits which practice, and the confidentiality questions to answer before any client detail goes into a notes app.

We use cookies for analytics to improve your experience. Learn more