Case 3-7 Shell v. R. W. Sturge, Ltd. I need to brief this case.
I have a guideline that I use but I need some guidance. I am trying to write a brief for a group of people that know nothing about the law but they need to make a business decision for their company base on my brief.
I started with the name of the case.
Tribunal- I quoted who decided the case but I had problem understanding rather to use the US sixth circuit cout of appeals or the other courts mention.
Parties- I tell who the plaintiffs are, but I need to explain their relationship.
Facts- I was trying to tell the story of the parties and how they got into the legal dispute. I really need some pointers on this one.
Rule- I am not quite sure what the rule of law that the court applies to answer the question posed by the issue.
Holding - I need some pointers onstating the tribunal's answer to the legal question posed by the issue.
Reasoning- How would you break down the court logic into each step that the court took to answer the question. How the court applied the elements of the law.
Judgement- At this point, I am to describe what action the tribunal took as a result of holding it reached on the issue put to it.
Observation- Here I needed to reflect on what this case teaches.
The case I am working on can be found at
Tribunal: This case is an appeal, so both the lower court (trial court) and the higher court (appeals court) decisions are important. The investors (appellants) sought review of a decision (meaning that they didn't like the lower court's holding so they appealed to a higher court) from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, which dismissed their action. Now the case is being heard in the US Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit.
Parties: The plaintiff-appellants are Shell, Hauck, and Middendorff. They represent a class of Ohio individuals who invested in the defendant-appellees foreign insurance market, R.W. Sturge and the Council/Society/Corporation of Lloyd's. The plaintiffs are trying to rescind their investment contracts with the defendants by suing under Ohio securities law.
Issues: There are a few issues present in this case. Here are two to get you started: Are the forum selection clauses in the contracts enforceable? Is the fact that parties will have to structure their case differently in a foreign court than if they were litigating in federal court a sufficient reason to defeat a forum ...
Dispute Settlement case is explicated.
Dispute Settlement - Criminal Case
ABC is a multinational enterprise (MNE) incorporated in State X. ABC entered into a joint venture agreement with XYZ, an MNE incorporated in State Y, to jointly produce a new line of hydraulic equipment in ABC's new factory in State Z, a developing nation. ABC & XYZ have mutually agreed to have the law of State Y govern any disputes or concerns arising under the joint venture agreement. Shortly after the conclusion of the agreement, a wiring defect in ABC's factory caused it to burn to the ground, killing five tourists in the immediate vicinty who were nationals (citizens) of State Q. XYZ, fearing bad publicity, sued ABC to rescind the joint venture agreement. X,Y, & Z are all common law states, while Q is a civil law jurisdiction.
Should a criminal case be filed, analyze the possible arguments and counter-arguments that counsel for either ABC or XYZ could reasonably make for having the case heard in the municipals courts of:
a. State X
b. State Y
c. State Z
d. State Q
Should a civil lawsuit between ABC and XYZ be filed, analyze the possible arguments and counter-arguments that counsel for either ABC or XYZ would reasonably make for having the case heard in the municipal courts of:
a. State X
b. State Y
c. State Z
d. State QView Full Posting Details