Comments for eCasebriefs

Comment on Sanborn v. McLean by sbostick

sbostick — Thu, 10 Jun 2010 16:27:39 +0000

THANKS Snowake!!!! That commment helped ALOT!!!

Comment on Draper v. United States by Facebook User

Facebook User — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 11:12:51 +0000

The following circumstances did not give the agent probable cause because the information is based off of an arbitrary physical description of a random person. The informant could have easily framed an innocent person by describing what they would be wearing that day.

Comment on Mahoney v. Grainger by dgray

dgray — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 17:19:13 +0000

not really, it appears to be all complete and totally helpful…

Comment on Mahoney v. Grainger by Joseph Geller

Joseph Geller — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:35:46 +0000

This brief appears incomplete.

Comment on Johnson v. Johnson by Joseph Geller

Joseph Geller — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:23:52 +0000

This case brief appears to be incomplete. It appears to stop in the middle of the Facts section.

Comment on Sanborn v. McLean by snowake

snowake — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:16:57 +0000

This is misleading. Although the Court uses the term easement, it is due to Courts using the terms negative easement and negative equitable servitude interchangeably, since they are nearly identical. The difference being that an equitable servitude is subject to the Statute of Frauds and may not arise by implication, adverse possession, necessity, etc. Furthermore, negative easements are often in gross (conservation), whereas equitable servitudes are never in gross. This case is an illustration of an exception by some states to the typical servitude, allowing an equitable servitude to be implied in common residential development schemes, because the benefit and burden is reciprocal.

Comment on Issue Preclusion by dgray

dgray — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 16:31:30 +0000

hey, i like this very much

Comment on Bill of Rights by kittyfiend

kittyfiend — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 17:49:45 +0000

I have listened to other audio lectures regarding Constitutional Law and have found the lectures by Professor Araiza the best. They are clear, concise, and help make the concepts easier to understand.

Comment on O’Neal v. Wilkes by riveramike

riveramike — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 07:11:12 +0000

Excellent tool. Very clear and concise.

Comment on Hamdi v. Rumsfeld by dgray

dgray — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:33:42 +0000

thank you for altering us of this issue. We will have the rest of it posted within 24 hours.

eCasebriefs.com support team