Question
-
In this graded project, you will have to do case briefing. Case briefing is important to every legal field. When you prepare this project you will get a good grasp and understanding on how to go about with the procedure and method of preparing a case brief.
Here, you will be briefing the case found at the given link. Please click on it and make sure you follow it thoroughly. Also, to help you with this procedure, please make sure that you follow another link, which is provided here, for format required for case briefing. You must include the following five sections of the brief:
- Citation
- Facts
- Issue
- Decision
- Reason
Case briefing is important to virtually every legal field. You’ll brief the case found at: https://public.courts.in.gov/Decisions/api/Document/Opinion?Id=4dZ4QTcCQIhzbrcSJw3Vwu9qG8IkRT4IPM4UeEY--zLDfUY_dycmW9xE0RhWEtnE0
| Subject | Law and governance | Pages | 4 | Style | APA |
|---|
Answer
NATARE CORPORATION v. D.S.I., DURAPLASTEC SYSTEMS, INC.
Facts
The above case originates from a business competition between the parties to this suit. In 1998, they agree to settle the pending cases in Court that that they shall not provide or publish disparaging information against each other. Further to that, they also agreed that that they shall subject any arising dispute to mediation or any other form of alternative dispute resolution mechanism before taking the same to court. They also agreed that any party that breaches their contractual obligations is liable to pay the other party a total sum of five thousand dollars for damages and costs.
However, in 2002, Natare failed to secure a contract from some client in Colorado. Natare then complained that the failure to secure the contract was due to the disparaging remarks that D.S.I had made against them, and that they suffered damages amounting to forty-five thousand dollars. Having heard the arbitration, the arbitrator concluded that D.S.I had violated the contractual obligations and terms by publishing he damaging information. On his side, the arbitrator observed Natare had failed to demonstrate that he suffered any actual loss. He went ahead to award Natare only five thousand dollars to compensate for the liquidated damages but not actual damages.
In his last wards, the arbitrator established that neither Natare not D. S.I was bound to receive orders as to costs or attorney’s fees. Consequently, Natare went to the high court to challenge the orders from the arbitral process, arguing that he was entitled to costs and attorney’s fees. At the high court, Natare made applications for judicial review proceedings. The high accepted to entertain the matter, and made its ruling after hearing both sides over the said issues but agreed the with arbitrator`s findings.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION
Natare raised an issue with the finding at the high court for hearing and determination. One of the issues was whether the arbitrator was justified in failing to grant him the attorney`s fees.
DECISION
Having heard the submissions from both sides, the high made its ruling and established that the arbitrator had not acted in excess of his powers. Moreover, the high court concluded that the Indiana law did not allow for any alteration of the awards and therefore could not make any such orders. As such, the court upheld the arbitrator`s findings. However, the Court of Appeal on its side reversed the High Court`s judgement, finding that the arbitrator acted ultra vires. The Court of Appeal made orders to the effect that the case was to go back to the arbitrator to reconsider his findings about the attorney’s fee.
REASON
The High Court`s reason for its finding emanated from the fact that the arbitrator had exercised his responsibilities properly when reaching the conclusion about awarding attorney`s fees. The Court of Appeal o the other decided to take the case back to the arbitrator because the law did not allow them to make any alterations on the awards.