Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

Andresen v. Maryland

United States Supreme Court
427 U.S. 463 (1976)


Facts

In 1972, a real estate attorney named Andresen (defendant) came under investigation for fraud. The investigation revealed that Andresen had defrauded the purchaser of Lot 13T by claiming the property was free of encumbrances and did not require title insurance, though Andresen knew that there were two existing liens. The purchaser had to stop construction when the lienholders threatened foreclosure. Andresen then defrauded the title insurance company he worked for and issued an insurance policy to the purchaser warranting clear title on the land. The investigators were able to show probable cause, and a judge with the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Montgomery County issued warrants to search Andresen’s law and corporate offices for documents concerning the sale of Lot 13T. On October 31, 1972, the offices were searched and numerous files were seized. Andresen was criminally charged with false pretenses and fraudulent misappropriation by a fiduciary. At trial, Andresen moved to suppress the seized documents. He argued that the phrase “together with other fruits, instrumentalities and evidence of crime at this (time) unknown” at the end of the document lists in the warrants rendered them “general” warrants, which are prohibited by the Fourth Amendment. The motion was denied. Andresen was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to eight two-year prison terms, running concurrently. The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland affirmed the validity of the search warrants.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Dissent (Brennan, J.)

The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 166,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.