Brief Browning v Poirier Oral Agreement Case Study
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Brief Browning v Poirier Oral Agreement Case Study
Option #1: Brief Walters v. YMCA on p. 468-470.
Option #2: Brief Browning v. Poirier on p. 489-491.
For both options, use pages 29-30 for reference. Your brief should be 1 to 2 pages in Times New Roman font, 12 points. In your brief, you should include the following information:
Identify the parties.
Possible questions to answer would be: Who is the plaintiff? The defendant? The appellant? The appellee?
What is the history of the case?
Possible questions to answer would be: Who won at trial court? Who won at the lower appellate level? Who won in this decision? Please note that this is the history of the case in court—not the facts of the case.
What are the facts?
Possible questions to answer would be: What happened that caused the plaintiff to sue? What facts did the Court find relevant in its decision?
What is the plaintiff’s theory?
Possible questions to answer would be: Why he thinks he should win? What facts does the plaintiff think are important?
What is the defendant’s theory?
Possible questions to answer would be: Why she thinks she should win? What facts does the defendant think are important?
What is the legal issue?
Tip: this will be a question that can be answered with yes or no and should end with a question mark.
What is the holding of the Court?
Tip: this will be either yes or no and will answer the legal issue.
What is the reasoning of the Court?
Possible questions to answer would be: what facts and laws did the Court rely on to decide the case? why was the case decided in the winner’s favor? why did the other side lose?
Evaluative Question for Reflection: What do you think about this case? Was this case decided correctly? Why or why not?
Brief Browning v Poirier Oral Agreement Case Study
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow