Lesson 1 of 0

In Progress

4.2: Reading Strategies

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” sticky_enabled=”0″]

Goal

To become aware of reading strategies to help improve comprehension when reading cases.
To use reading order and your knowledge of the parts of a case to help you read cases more effectively and efficiently.
To try out and experiment with reading order and other reading strategies.

A better way to read a case

Normally when we read for enjoyment e.g., a mystery novel) we don’t want to “ruin the ending.” We generally don’t want to know anything about the book before we read it. We want to be surprised. We want to be led on an exciting journey. We don’t want anyone to ruin the ending. So we start on page one and read straight through to the end.
However, when we read court opinions (and any other legal or academic texts), it’s the opposite: It’s helpful to know as much as you can before you even start reading. So starting at the beginning and just reading straight through is actually an inefficient way to read a case.
Unlike a mystery novel, with a court opinion, you really should ruin the ending, so to speak.
Also, if you are a non-native English speaker, the more context you can have the better. By changing the order of how you read a case, you actually can give yourself more context which means it will improve your comprehension of the case.
In the previous activity, we talked about how to create purpose and context by looking at the syllabus for your course and/or the table of contents of your case book or textbook.
Now we’ll talk about how to improve your reading comprehension by changing the order you read a case and by using your knowledge of the parts of a case.

Our suggested reading order

Case heading (sometimes called case caption)
Disposition
Holding
Issue
Procedural History
Facts
Rule
Reasoning

Here’s why we suggest it:

1. The case heading and disposition are the two easiest things to find.
2. The disposition, in particular, tells you the result: who won and who lost. That is extremely helpful information to know when you’re reading the opinion and trying to follow a complicated story. It’s also easy to find since it’s almost always at the very end of the case, and you’re looking primarily for two words–either “AFFIRMED” or “REVERSED.”
3. Next, the holding is often a little easier to find becase it’s a) usually close to the end, b) often uses the phrase “we” or “the Court”, and c) often includes a word or phrase that indicates opinion. For example, “We believe that….” or “This court is of the opinion that….” Another clue is that the holding will not have a citation at the end of the sentence. This is because the holding is the court’s opinion and the court’s own words. So it doesn’t need to cite to any outside source.
4. Next (or if it’s not easy to find the holding), look for the issue. The main clue for the issue is the word “whether.” Not every sentence with “whether” is the issue. But the statement of the issue usually has the word “whether” in it. So if you find the word “whether,” it helps narrow down your choices. Note: Sometimes synonyms for “whether” are used, e.g., “if.” Or you might see a phrase like “the question is presented…” or “the challenge…” or “the court must determine…”
5. If you find the issue and the holding, the next step is to see if they match. The holding should answer the question raised by the statement of the issue. And if you understand the question and the answer, then when you start reading the rest of the case, it’s going to make a lot more sense.
6. Note: This strategy doesn’t work every time. But it works most of the time. In the US legal system, there is no fixed format or style that judges must use when they write opinions. Issue statements are frequently closer to the beginning, and holdings are frequently closer to the ending. But that’s not always true. But in the cases where the issue and holding are easy to find, then your work will be much easier if you find them first.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ module_id=”StrategyStep1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”151deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#ffffff 0%|#e5e5e5 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#ffffff” background_color_gradient_end=”#e5e5e5″ background_image=”https://uslawessentials.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Untitled-design-4.png” background_size=”contain” background_position=”top_left” custom_margin=”||||false|false” custom_padding=”||0px||false|false” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Case Heading

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#LefkowitzHeading” button_text=”Show me this in the case” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” sticky_enabled=”0″]

The case heading in Lefkowitz reads:

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc., 251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 (1957)

No. 37,220.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Tips

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider color=”#7CDA24″ divider_weight=”6px” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” width=”20%” height=”6px” border_radii=”on|20px|20px|20px|20px” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

To distinguish federal and state courts note that federal courts will have “United States” in their names. For example, “United States Circuit Court” or “Supreme Court of the United States.” Here, the court name is “Supreme Court of Minnesota” so we know this is a state court, not a federal court.
State court names differ from state to state. But you can usually recognize an appellate court by name if it says, “Supreme Court of [State]” or if you see words such as “Appellate” or “Appeals” in the court name.
Case headings sometimes include a case number (such as No.37.320 or 11-cv-1800 or something like that) but this is not relevant for reading or understanding the case.
If you’d like to understand more about the relationship between the federal and state court systems, here is a short video:

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_video src=”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4GU1ha2Pq8″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_video][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Notes

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider color=”#f5ca4e” divider_weight=”6px” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” width=”20%” height=”6px” border_radii=”on|20px|20px|20px|20px” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Lefkowitz was decided by the highest court in Minnesota. While the holding is only binding precedent on lower courts in Minnesota, that this case was included in a case book suggests that its reasoning is persuasive.
The case was decided back in 1957. As a general rule, lawyers in the United States always check to make sure that other courts have not subsequently disagreed with the decision. When a case is a bit older, such as Lefkowitz, an attorney should always check whether more recent cases are consistent with an older case’s decision.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row column_structure=”1_4,1_4,1_2″ use_custom_gutter=”on” gutter_width=”1″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”150deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#ffdf51 0%|#e5ac49 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#ffdf51″ background_color_gradient_end=”#e5ac49″ module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px||0px||true|false” filter_opacity=”0%” sticky_position=”bottom” sticky_offset_bottom=”1px” sticky_limit_top=”section” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” box_shadow_style=”preset1″ box_shadow_blur=”50px” box_shadow_color=”rgba(0,0,0,0.13)” global_colors_info=”{}” filter_opacity__sticky=”100%” filter_opacity__sticky_enabled=”on|sticky”][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Poppins|700|||||||” text_text_color=”#ffffff” text_font_size=”27px” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_translate=”0px|-20px” transform_translate_linked=”off” text_orientation=”center” width=”60%” module_alignment=”center” custom_padding=”20px||20px||true|false” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” box_shadow_style=”preset1″ global_colors_info=”{}”]

Step 1

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”1%||1%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_2_font=”Poppins|500|||||||” header_2_text_align=”left” header_2_text_color=”#6d40ed” header_2_letter_spacing=”-1px” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” header_2_text_align_tablet=”center” header_2_text_align_phone=”” header_2_text_align_last_edited=”on|desktop” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Look at the case heading

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”1_2″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”2%||2%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display|700|||||||” text_text_color=”rgba(109,64,237,0.46)” text_font_size=”20px” background_layout=”dark” text_orientation_tablet=”center” text_orientation_phone=”” text_orientation_last_edited=”on|phone” global_colors_info=”{}”]

What information can we get from the case heading (also known as the caption)?

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ module_id=”StrategyStep2″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”151deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#ffffff 0%|#e5e5e5 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#ffffff” background_color_gradient_end=”#e5e5e5″ background_image=”https://uslawessentials.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Untitled-design-4.png” background_size=”contain” background_position=”top_left” custom_margin=”||||false|false” custom_padding=”||0px||false|false” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Disposition

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#Disposition” button_text=”Show me this in the case” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

The disposition is Lefkowitz is that this court “affirmed” the decision of the lower court (see sentence [32])

Tips

On appeal, courts will typically either affirm or reverse/vacate the lower court’s decision. To affirm means to agree with with the lower court’s decision, while reversing or vacating means the appellate court disagrees with the decision of the lower court.
If an appellate court remands the case to a lower court, that means the appellate court returns the case to the lower court. Sometimes the appellate court will provide the lower court with some instructions to follow once the case is returned.
If the case is a trial level decision the disposition will typically be the court granting or denying a motion by one of the parties. A motion is where a party requests a decision by a judge on a particular legal question. For example, a defendant might move that the judge dismiss the case because the court lacks jurisdiction.

Notes

The Lefkowitz court affirmed the decision of the lower court, meaning the Supreme Court of Minnesota agreed that the lower court reached the correct result.
Knowing that the lower court reached a correct result is not enough for the reader. We need to know why the appellate court concluded that the lower court reached the correct result and why this Court reasons that the outcome reached by the lower court should stand.

Step 2

Find the disposition

The disposition tells us the final outcome of the case.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ module_id=”StrategyStep3″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”151deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#ffffff 0%|#e5e5e5 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#ffffff” background_color_gradient_end=”#e5e5e5″ background_image=”https://uslawessentials.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Untitled-design-4.png” background_size=”contain” background_position=”top_left” custom_margin=”||||false|false” custom_padding=”||0px||false|false” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Holding

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#lefkholding” button_text=”Show me this in the case” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

You can find the holding in sentences [26] – [28] of the case where the judge explains that defendant store’s advertisement constituted an offer and that plaintiff accepted the offer, thereby forming a contract.

Also, note that in sentence [30] of the case the Court holds that once the contract was formed, defendant lost the power to change the terms of its offer by claiming that only female shoppers had the right to purchase the clothing at the advertised price.

Tips

Language clues to indicate the holding include when the court uses the present simple. For example, “We hold that….We find that …We are of the opinion that….We decide that….”
The holding is usually near the end of the case and often near the beginning, too.
When you read the holding you should have a better idea of which party prevailed and why. If you are in law school and checked your professor’s syllabus and the table of contents from your casebook, the holding should be consistent with the case’s place in your course. For example, if you are studying what an offer is, the holding in Lefkowitz should help clarify what constitutes an offer.
Until you read the rest of the case you may not completely understand the holding completely. But the holding will help you understand the reasoning and the facts, and then the reasoning and facts will help clarify the holding.

Notes

The Lefkowitz court held that the defendant’s newspaper advertisement was sufficiently definite so plaintiff had the power to accept the offer and form a contract.
Normally, an advertisement is merely an invitation to negotiate but this advertisement was apparently sufficiently definite.
One difficulty for the reader could be that in sentences [26] – [28] the Court does not specifically explain why this offer was sufficiently definite. The reader needs to look carefully at the facts to discern that by including price, quantity, and limiting the offer to the first person who claims the offer, defendant created a legally binding offer.
Note: Consider whether the holding would have been different if the facts were different. For example, let’s say the defendant store said a “few” fur coats were available “for a short time and at a great price”. Would this be an offer?

Step 3

Find the holding

By finding the holding you will be able to understand the logic of the court’s reasoning more easily.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ module_id=”StrategyStep4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”151deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#ffffff 0%|#e5e5e5 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#ffffff” background_color_gradient_end=”#e5e5e5″ background_image=”https://uslawessentials.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Untitled-design-4.png” background_size=”contain” background_position=”top_left” custom_margin=”||||false|false” custom_padding=”||0px||false|false” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Issue

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#LefkowitzIssue” button_text=”Show me this in the case” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

You can find the issue in sentence [20] of the case where the court explains that it must decide “whether the advertisement constituted an offer, and, if so, whether the plaintiff’s conduct constituted an acceptance.”

Tips

Language clues to find the issue are words that signal a question. For example, “The question before us is whether….we granted certiorari on the question of whether …. the issue is ….”
Sometimes a court might not directly state the issue. You may need to infer the issue by reading the holding and the parties’ opposing arguments to understand the issue.
When you rephrase the issue in a case brief, you will probably find it helpful to be more specific. For example, don’t write that the issue was “whether the plaintiff should prevail” or “whether there was a contract.” Instead, phrase the issue with enough detail so you will understand the significance of the case – – for example, “Did an advertisement in a newspaper constitute an offer?” or “Did a clothing advertisement in a newspaper constitute an offer where the advertisement specified price, quantity, and how the offer could be accepted?”

Notes

The Lefkowitz court actually raises two issues: (i) was there an offer; and if so, (ii) was there an acceptance? But because the trickier issue is whether there was an offer, most students read the case as concerning whether there was an offer, without as much attention to whether there was an acceptance.
There are also a few sub-issues in the case, such as the amount of damages to which plaintiff would be entitled. But most students read this case for purposes of understanding when an advertisement could be an offer.

Step 4

Find the issue

The issue is the legal question the court answers in its holding.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ module_id=”StrategyStep5″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”151deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#ffffff 0%|#e5e5e5 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#ffffff” background_color_gradient_end=”#e5e5e5″ background_image=”https://uslawessentials.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Untitled-design-4.png” background_size=”contain” background_position=”top_left” custom_margin=”||||false|false” custom_padding=”||0px||false|false” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Procedural History

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#LefkPh” button_text=”Show me this in the case” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

You can find the procedural history in sentences [1] – [2] of the case where the court explains that this is an appeal from a judgment by a Minnesota trial court.

Tips

Procedural history refers to what happened in the case after the case came to court.
Remember, facts are the story of the dispute before the case came to court.
A procedural history will often include what occurred in a trial court and sometimes what occurred in an intermediate-level appellate court.
Keep in mind that appellate courts focus on legal errors by lower court judges. For that reason, you should not expect to read cases concerning whether a jury reached the wrong verdict but rather whether a judge made mistake in applying or interpreting the law.

Notes

The Lefkowitz court discusses what occurred in the trial court in the procedural history.
The trial court apparently denied defendant’s motion for amended findings of fact and, in the alternative, for a new trial. This procedural history does not provide much detail for the reader but it is enough for us to know that plaintiff prevailed and defendant is arguing that the trial court judge made certain legal errors.

Step 5

Find the procedural history

The procedural history is how the case progressed in the courts after the litigation commenced.

FACTS

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#LefkFacts” button_text=”Show me this in the case” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

You can find the facts in sentences [3]- [8] the case where the court discusses the store’s advertisement and the plaintiff shopper’s attempt to purchase the clothing at the price advertised.

Tips

Facts are what happened with the parties before the case came to court.
Remember, facts are the story of what led to the dispute.
Facts in a case are always in the past tense and yo should refer to the facts in a case in the past tense.

Notes

One point that the Lefkowitz court does not perhaps emphasize enough is exactly why it reached its decision based on the facts presented.
But if you read the facts you can see why the Court decided that this advertisement was sufficiently specific to constitute an offer.
You can see how the advertisement not only included a price, but there was also a quantity, and instructions on when and how to claim the offer..
In your own legal writing, it is a good idea to expressly show how a legal result relates to specific facts.

Step 6

Read the Facts

Facts are the events that occurred before the litigation commenced – the story that led to the dispute.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ module_id=”LefkRule” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”151deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#ffffff 0%|#e5e5e5 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#ffffff” background_color_gradient_end=”#e5e5e5″ background_image=”https://uslawessentials.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Untitled-design-4.png” background_size=”contain” background_position=”top_left” custom_margin=”||||false|false” custom_padding=”||0px||false|false” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row column_structure=”2_5,3_5″ make_equal=”on” _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_color=”rgba(130,100,239,0.09)” module_alignment=”center” overflow-x=”visible” overflow-y=”visible” custom_margin=”5%||||false|false” custom_padding=”0px|5%|0px|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”2_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”5%||5%||true|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” header_3_font=”Poppins||||||||” header_3_text_color=”#6929aa” header_3_font_size=”35px” header_3_letter_spacing=”-1px” global_colors_info=”{}”]

RULE

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#LefkRule” button_text=”Show me this in the case” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

You can find the Rule in sentences [21]- [25] of the case. By Rule we mean the law that the court applied to the case to reach its holding. The Lefkowitz Court writes that while advertisements in newspapers are often merely invitations to negotiate, when an advertisement “is clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract.”

Also, in sentence [31] of the case the Court explains another Rule, that once a contract is formed, a party cannot change the terms of an offer. This deals with a sub-issue of the case because defendant store claimed that it was allowed to restrict the offer to women shoppers. But the advertisement did not say that only women could accept the offer, so this argument failed.

Tips

You can think of the holding as new law that emerges from a case and the Rule as the law that the court applies to the facts to reach the holding.
Sometimes the Rule is well-settled but sometimes the Court will have to choose between competing Rules or may come up with a new Rule.

Notes

The Lefkowitz Court – -Minnesota’s Supreme Court – – cites numerous decisions from other states which held that advertisements may constitute an offer so long as the advertisement is sufficiently definite.
This Court was not the first Court to hold that a newspaper advertisement may constitute an offer but it is widely read in law schools because it explains clearly the difference between advertisements that merely invite negotiations and advertisements that are offers to enter into a contract.

Step 7

Read the Rule

Rule refers to law that the court relied on to reach its decision.

REASONING

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_divider show_divider=”off” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_divider][et_pb_button button_url=”#lefkholding” button_text=”Show me this in the case” module_id=”lefkholding” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][et_pb_column type=”3_5″ _builder_version=”4.16″ _module_preset=”default” background_enable_color=”off” use_background_color_gradient=”on” background_color_gradient_direction=”158deg” background_color_gradient_stops=”#7b47ff 0%|#6929aa 100%” background_color_gradient_start=”#7b47ff” background_color_gradient_end=”#6929aa” transform_scale=”107%|107%” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” border_radii=”on|10px|10px|10px|10px” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” text_font=”Playfair Display||||||||” text_font_size=”16px” background_layout=”dark” custom_padding=”5%|5%|5%|5%|true|true” global_colors_info=”{}”]

You can find the reasoning in sentences [26]- [30] of the case. This is the same section where you find the holding but it also contains the Court’s reasoning. The Court holds that the advertisement was an offer in sentence [26], that plaintiff accepted the offer in sentence [27], thereby forming a contract in sentence [28]. In sentences [29] – [31] the Court explains that once the offer was accepted, defendant was not allowed to change the terms of the offer.

Tips

The Lefkowitz case is slightly challenging in that the holding and the reasoning of the Court can be found in the same sentences and the Court does not explicitly explain why the advertisement was sufficiently definite to form an offer.
As you read U.S. cases, look for instances where the reasoning of the Court might be explained in distinct sections of the case.

Notes

If you wanted to expressly write out the Court’s reasoning it would look something like this:
- Advertisements are offers when they are sufficiently definite. [Rule]
- The advertisement here was sufficiently definite because it included price, quantity, and a method to accept the offer. [Reasoning]
- Therefore, when plaintiff was the first to accept the offer according to its terms, the parties formed a contract. [Holding]; AND
- When contracts are formed, one party cannot change the terms of the contract without the other party’s consent. [Rule]
- After plaintiff accepted the store’s offer, the parties formed a contract and neither party was allowed to change the contract. [Reasoning]
- Therefore, defendant store was not allowed to back out of the contract by claiming only women could buy the items. [Holding]

Step 8

Reasoning

Understand the rationale of the Court as it applied law to facts

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ module_id=”LefkowitzHeading” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc.

251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 (1957)

No. 37,220.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

[Case Caption: This provides us with important information about the case, including the year it was decided, whether it was a federal or state court, and what level court (trial or appellate)]

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”#StrategyStep1″ button_text=”Take me back to case reading strategies” button_alignment=”center” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text module_id=”LefkPh” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(1) This is an appeal from an order of the Municipal Court of Minneapolis denying the motion of the defendant for amended findings of fact, or, in the alternative, for a new trial. (2)The order for judgment awarded the plaintiff the sum of $138.50 as damages for breach of contract.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”#StrategyStep5″ button_text=”Back to case reading strategies” button_alignment=”right” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text module_id=”LefkFacts” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(3) This case grows out of the alleged refusal of the defendant to sell to the plaintiff a certain fur piece which it had offered for sale in a newspaper advertisement. (4)It appears from the record that on April 6, 1956, the defendant published the following advertisement in a Minneapolis newspaper:

Saturday 9 A.M. Sharp 3 Brand New Fur Coats Worth to $100.00

First Come First Served $1 Each

(5)On April 13, the defendant again published an advertisement in the same

newspaper as follows:

Saturday 9 A.M. 2 Brand New Pastel Mink 3-Skin Scarfs Selling for $89.50

Out they go Saturday. Each … $1.00

1 Black Lapin Stole Beautiful, worth $139.50 … $1.00

First Come First Served

(6)The record supports the findings of the court that on each of the Saturdays following the publication of the above-described ads the plaintiff was the first to present himself at the appropriate counter in the defendant’s store and on each occasion demanded the coat and the stole so advertised and indicated his readiness to pay the sale price of $1. (7)On both occasions, the defendant refused to sell the merchandise to the plaintiff, stating on the first occasion that by a ‘house rule’ the offer was intended for women only and sales would not be made to men, and on the second visit that plaintiff knew defendant’s house rules.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”#StrategyStep5″ button_text=”Back to case reading strategies” button_alignment=”center” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(8)The trial court properly disallowed plaintiff’s claim for the value of the fur coats since the value of these articles was speculative and uncertain. (9)The only evidence of value was the advertisement itself to the effect that the coats were ‘Worth to $100.00,‘ how much less being speculative especially in view of the price for which they were offered for sale. (10)With reference to the offer of the defendant on April 13, 1956, to sell the ‘1 Black Lapin Stole * * * worth $139.50 * * *‘ the trial court held that the value of this article was established and granted judgment in favor of the plaintiff for that amount less the $1 quoted purchase price.

(11)The defendant contends that a newspaper advertisement offering items of merchandise for sale at a named price is a ‘unilateral offer’ which may be withdrawn without notice. (12)He relies upon authorities which hold that, where an advertiser publishes in a newspaper that he has a certain quantity or quality of goods which he wants to dispose of at certain prices and on certain terms, such advertisements are not offers which become contracts as soon as any person to whose notice they may come signifies his acceptance by notifying the other that he will take a certain quantity of them. (13)Such advertisements have been construed as an invitation for an offer of sale on the terms stated, which offer, when received, may be accepted or rejected and which therefore does not become a contract of sale until accepted by the seller; and until a contract has been so made, the seller **691 may modify or revoke such prices or terms. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Johnson, 209 Mass. 89, 95 N.E. 290; Nickel v. Theresa Farmers Co-op. Ass’n, 247 Wis. 412, 20 N.W.2d 117; Lovett v. Frederick Loeser & Co. Inc., 124 Misc. 81, 207 N.Y.S. 753; *191 Schenectady Stove Co. v. Holbrook, 101 N.Y. 45, 4 N.E. 4; Georgian Co. v. Bloom, 27 Ga.App. 468, 108 S.E. 813; Craft v. Elder & Johnson Co., 38 N.E.2d 416, 34 Ohio L.A. 603; Annotation, 157 A.L.R. 746.

(14)The defendant relies principally on Craft v. Elder & Johnston Co. supra. (15)In that case, the court discussed the legal effect of an advertisement offering for sale, as a one-day special, an electric sewing machine at a named price. (16)The view was expressed that the advertisement was (38 N.E.2d 417, 34 Ohio L.A. 605) ‘not an offer made to any specific person but was made to the public generally. (17)Thereby it would be properly designated as a unilateral offer and not being supported by any consideration could be withdrawn at will and without notice.’ (18)It is true that such an offer may be withdrawn before acceptance. (19)Since all offers are by their nature unilateral because they are necessarily made by one party or on one side in the negotiation of a contract, the distinction made in that decision between a unilateral offer and a unilateral contract is not clear.

[/et_pb_text][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text module_id=”LefkowitzIssue” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(20) On the facts before us we are concerned with whether the advertisement constituted an offer, and, if so, whether the plaintiff’s conduct constituted an acceptance.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”#StrategyStep4″ button_text=”back to case reading strategies” button_alignment=”right” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” custom_padding=”0px|||||” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text module_id=”LefkRule” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(21)There are numerous authorities which hold that a particular advertisement in a newspaper or circular letter relating to a sale of articles may be construed by the court as constituting an offer, acceptance of which would complete a contract. J. E. Pinkham Lumber Co. v. C. W. Griffin & Co., 212 Ala. 341, 102 So. 689; Seymour v. Armstrong & Kassebaum, 62 Kan. 720, 64 P. 612; Payne v. Lautz Bros. & Co., City Ct., 166 N.Y.S. 844, affirmed, 168 N.Y.S. 369, affirmed, 185 App.Div. 904, 171 N.Y.S. 1094; Arnold v. Phillips, 1 Ohio Dec. Reprint 195, 3 West.Law J. 448; Oliver v. Henley, Tex.Civ.App., 21 S.W.2d 576; Annotation, 157 A.L.R. 744, 746.

(22)The test of whether a binding obligation may originate in advertisements addressed to the general public is ‘whether the facts show that some performance was promised in positive terms in return for something requested.’ 1 Williston, Contracts (Rev. ed.) s 27.

(23)The authorities above cited emphasize that, where the offer is clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract. (24)The most recent case on the subject is *192 Johnson v. Capital City Ford Co., La.App., 85 So.2d 75, in which the court pointed out that a newspaper advertisement relating to the purchase and sale of automobiles may constitute an offer, acceptance of which will consummate a contract and create an obligation in the offeror to perform according to the terms of the published offer.

(25)Whether in any individual instance a newspaper advertisement is an offer rather than an invitation to make an offer depends on the legal intention of the parties and the surrounding circumstances. Annotation, 157 A.L.R. 744, 751; 77 C.J.S., Sales, s 25b; 17 C.J.S., Contracts, s 389.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”#StrategyStep3″ button_text=”Take me back to case reading strategies” button_alignment=”center” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][et_pb_text module_id=”lefkholding” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(26)We are of the view on the facts before us that the offer by the defendant of the sale of the Lapin fur was clear, definite, and explicit, and left nothing open for negotiation. (27)The plaintiff having successfully managed to be the first one to appear at the seller’s place of business to be served, as requested by the advertisement, and having offered the stated purchase price of the article, he was entitled to performance on the part of the defendant. (28)We think the trial court was correct in holding that there was in the conduct of the parties a sufficient mutuality of obligation to constitute a contract of sale.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”#StrategyStep3″ button_text=”Take me back to case reading strategies” button_alignment=”right” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][et_pb_text _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(29)The defendant contends that the offer was modified by a ‘house rule’ to the effect that only women were qualified to receive the bargains advertised. (30)The advertisement contained no such restriction. (31)This objection may be disposed of briefly by stating that, while an advertiser has the right at any time before acceptance to modify his offer, he does not have the right, after acceptance, to impose new or arbitrary conditions not contained in the published offer. Payne v. Lautz Bros. & Co., City Ct., 166 N.Y.S. 844, 848; Mooney v. Daily News Co., 116 Minn. 212, 133 N.W. 573, 37 L.R.A.,N.S., 183.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_text module_id=”Disposition” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”]

(32) Affirmed.

[/et_pb_text][et_pb_button button_url=”#StrategyStep2″ button_text=”Take me back to case reading strategies” button_alignment=”center” _builder_version=”4.18.0″ _module_preset=”default” global_colors_info=”{}”][/et_pb_button][/et_pb_column][/et_pb_row][/et_pb_section]

4.2: Reading Strategies

A better way to read a case

<img class="lazyload" decoding="async" src="https://d15fwz9jg1iq5f.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/06103321/Blog-YOERMysteries.jpg" alt="26 of the Best Mystery Books That'll Keep You Guessing Until the Very End" width="257" height="178" style="font-size: 30px; float: right;" />

Our suggested reading order

Case Heading

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc., 251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 (1957)

No. 37,220.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Tips

Notes

Look at the case heading

Disposition

Tips

Notes

Find the disposition

Holding

Tips

Notes

Find the holding

Issue

Tips

Notes

Find the issue

Procedural History

Tips

Notes

Find the procedural history

FACTS

Tips

Notes

Read the Facts

RULE

Tips

Notes

Read the Rule

REASONING

Tips

Notes

Reasoning

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc.

251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 (1957)

Goal

A better way to read a case

Our suggested reading order

Case Heading

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc., 251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 (1957)

No. 37,220.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Tips

Notes

Look at the case heading

Disposition

Tips

Notes

Find the disposition

Holding

Tips

Notes

Find the holding

Issue

Tips

Notes

Find the issue

Procedural History

Tips

Notes

Find the procedural history

FACTS

Tips

Notes

Read the Facts

RULE

Tips

Notes

Read the Rule

REASONING

Tips

Notes

Reasoning

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc.