CRM 123 – Case Analysis Instructions
Purpose
The goals of this assignment are to provide a valuable skill and to assess your ability to comprehend and
apply case law. Reading, briefing, and applying what you are reading in your textbook and learning in the
modules are effective ways to become literate in the process of the U.S. legal system.
Conducting an Analysis
Before making and defending a decision, you must be familiar with the relevant law. For our purposes,
your textbook and course material provide all the legal concepts needed to apply the law to a factual
situation. Once you are familiar with the general content of the chapter, you should be able to recognize
the issue involved in a case and find the legal concepts that will help you decide the case. For your
reference, a sample analysis is provided at the end of this document.
First, you will read the assigned fact patterns (provided via a link in the module). Then, you will complete
an analysis for all fact patterns presented. Each analysis should contain the following:
1. The main issue. Identify and write (in your own words, at least 50% original) the central issue to be
decided. As much as possible, set the issue in legal terms and concepts.
2. Relevant legal concepts quoted from textbook court opinions. Search the assigned chapter for legal
concepts that will help you decide and justify your decision. Once you find the quotations you wish to use,
copy them into the appropriate places in your analysis.
3. Relevant case law quoted from the textbook.
4. Rationale. Write (in your own words, at least 50% original) a complete explanation about how you
used the legal concepts you cited to make a decision about how the case should be resolved.
5. Ruling. Describe (in your own words, at least 50% original) what should happen to the parties involved
as a result of your decision.
Submit your Case Analysis to the Assignment box no later than Sunday 11:59 PM EST/EDT of the
assigned module. (The Assignment box for these assignments maybe linked to Turnitin.)
Grading Rubric
Ratings:
Exceptional corresponds to an A (90-100). Performance is outstanding; significantly above the usual
expectations.
Proficient corresponds to a grade of B- to B+ (80-89%). Skills are at the level of expectation.
Basic corresponds to a C- to C+ (70-79%). Skills are acceptable but improvements are needed to meet
expectations well.
Novice corresponds to a D to D+ (60-69%). Performance is weak; the skills are not sufficiently
demonstrated at this time.
0 This criterion is missing or not in evidence.
Criteria
Correctly framing the specific legal question
to be decided
0
Novice
12-13
Basic
14-15
Ratings
Proficient
16-17
Exceptional
18-20
Identifying and quoting relevant material from
the assigned chapter
Correctly applying the cited legal concepts to
your decision
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-20
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-20
The insightfulness and organization of your
rationale
Originality and writing quality
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-20
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-20
Total
100
Academic Honesty
This assignment should include your original work and be treated as a take-home examination. You may
copy legal concepts and case law from the textbook into the “Relevant legal concepts” and “Relevant
case law” sections, but the rest should be written “in your own words” (at least 50% original). The
Dropboxes for all Case Analyses are linked to Turnitin, and each submission will be scanned for
originality. Substantial overlap with the writing of other students constitutes academic dishonesty and will
result in appropriate sanctions.
Sample Analysis Using Headings
Main Issue (your own words)
Has the State of Kentucky violated procedural due process by depriving inmates of a protected liberty
right to prison visitors with our a hearing to challenge a visitor who is banned?
Relevant Legal Concepts From Text (quoted from textbook opinions)
Procedural Due Process - 14th Amendment – Section 1. “...nor shall any state deprive any person of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; ...” (pp. 23 & A-2)
Relevant Liberty Definition: “...a vast scope of personal rights. It also infers the absence of arbitrary and
unreasonable government restraints. (p. 24)
“The due process guarantee protects people from unfairness in the operation of both substantive and
procedural law.” Procedural law prescribes the method used to enforce legal rights. It provides the
machinery by which individuals can enforce their rights or obtain redress for the invasion of such rights.”
(p. 24).
Since procedural due process rights cost the government time and money: “Courts generally therefore
generally try to balance accuracy against its cost on a case-by-case basis.”
Relevant case law from text:
Melinda Speelman v. Bellingham Housing Authority “Finally, … both the parties and the public have an
interest in ensuring that BHA administers its programs lawfully, Contrary to … contention, Speelman is
not asking for an exception to be applied to her case. She is asking that she be given the process due
her and everyone else in her situation. Therefore, the equities favor granting Speelman a preliminary
injunction.” (p.38)
Rationale (your own words):
Since BHA was aware that Speelman was in jail, they had an obligation to do more, even though they
reasonably attempted to reach Speelman. She was entitled to more due to the unusual set of
circumstances presented in the case and the failure to take additional action to properly serve Speelman
deprived her of her constitutionally guaranteed due process rights and she was put in a position of facing
eviction without benefit of a hearing.
Ruling (your own words)
The State of Kentucky need not provide hearings for denial of inmate visitors.
Sample Case Analysis in Essay Style
The main issue in this case is whether the State of Kentucky violated procedural due process by
depriving inmates of a protected liberty right to prison visitors, without a hearing to challenge a visitor who
is banned.
This is a due process case. Procedural Due Process is in the 14th Amendment – Section 1. “...nor shall
any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...” (pp. 28 & 671). The
relevant definitions here is the definition of liberty: “...a vast scope of personal rights. It also infers the
absence of arbitrary and unreasonable government restraints. (p. 29)
“The due process guarantee protects people from unfairness in the operation of both substantive and
procedural law.” Procedural law prescribes the method used to enforce legal rights. It provides the
machinery by which individuals can enforce their rights or obtain redress for the invasion of such rights.”
(p.29) Since procedural due process rights cost the government time and money: “Courts generally
therefore generally try to balance accuracy against its cost on a case-by-case basis.
The Court examined this issue in Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. John Doe, stating “In cases
such as Washington v. Constantineau (1971) and Goss v. Lopez (1975) we held that due process
required the government to afford the plaintiff a hearing to prove or disprove a particular set of facts.”
However, “...a convicted offender has already had a procedurally safeguarded opportunity to contest.”
“Plaintiffs who assert a right to a hearing under the Due Process Clause must show that the facts they
seek to establish in that hearing are relevant under the statutory scheme.” (p. 46)
Since the State of Kentucky had “...established regulations to guide prison officials in making visitation
decisions,” one could argue that an inmate’s liberty to have visitors has been recognized. It could be
further argued that denial of a hearing to challenge the finding that a specific visitor could be barred is
protected by due process. However, conducting court hearings requiring an adversary proceeding could
be unduly burdensome of the state and the liberty of an inmate has been deprived initially in a
procedurally safeguarded hearing. Deprivation of the liberty of convicted inmates to have specific visitors
is outweighed by the burden of conducting such hearings.
The court should rule in favor of the State of Kentucky.
CRM 123 – Case Analysis 4 Fact Patterns
Write an analysis for each scenario below. See the Case Analysis Instructions for
further information about completing the assignment.
1. During class on Wednesday, while showing a movie, Professor saw smoke and
smelled odor of marijuana from the back of the class. When she turned the lights on,
she could not tell who had been smoking, and no one confessed to smoking it. She
told the class that no one could leave until the perpetrator was identified. Professor
locked the doors. Four hours went by, and when still nobody confessed, the students
began to get anxious. Tyler grabbed Professor by the arms and shook her, shouting
“I’m not staying in here any longer!” Joseph helped him kick down the door and the
entire class followed them out. While leaving, Ron grabbed a piece of the door and
threw it at Professor, who ducked out of the way. The piece of the door instead hit
Diana, injuring her leg. Describe any and all torts you observe, and identify who can
sue whom and why.
2. Remember our friend Ana? You may recall she attempted to rob the bank, but
mistakenly grabbed the duffel bag of the person next to her and ran out of the bank.
When she got back to Summer’s car, she opened the bag and discovered it held
$100,000 and a gun. The tag on the bag read “If lost, return to Liz” along with an
address and phone number. Ana’s great attorney managed to have the case
dismissed, and she used some of the money from the bag to pay him, buy a brand
new Jeep Wrangler, and pay her tuition. She then spent the rest partying with
Jennifer, Felicia, and Katie. The group decided to go to Club Disco to hang out.
Alexis, the bartender, got a great tip by serving them Long Island Iced Teas all night.
She was even nice enough to help them to the car safely since they were stumbling
and falling. Ana sped off and hit Kurt’s car, which he was driving on the wrong side
of a two-way road with the headlights off. His car was totaled. Upon impact, Katie,
who was not wearing her seatbelt, fell out the back of the Jeep and hurt herself.
Describe any and all torts you observe, and identify who can sue whom, and why.
Include any defenses you see.
3. Rich is an avid duck hunter. One day, he spotted a beauty flying over his neighbor
Kim’s house. He aimed, fired, and shot the duck, which fell onto Kim’s roof. Matt
hopped over the fence into Kim’s yard then climbed on her roof. While retrieving the
duck, Matt slipped and fell off the roof, but luckily landed on the balcony outside of
Kim’s window. Matt peeked in and saw Kim and Carolyn watching “Glee,” dancing
around and lip syncing to the songs. He took some photos with his cell phone and
uploaded them to YouTube the next day. Describe any and all torts you observe,
and identify who can sue whom, and why.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment