From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Calder v. Bull
United States Supreme Court
3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 386 (1798)
- Written by Brent Newton, JD
Facts
The Court of Probate for Harford (probate court) invalidated the will of Normand Morrison, and, as a result, certain property vested in the Calders (plaintiffs). The Connecticut legislature then passed a law that set aside the decision of the probate court and granted a new hearing. The probate court approved the will on rehearing, divesting the property to the Bulls (defendants). The Calders appealed on the grounds that the new law was an ex post facto law and thus unconstitutional. The superior court and the Supreme Court of Connecticut ruled against the Calders, affirming the probate court. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Chase, J.)
Concurrence (Paterson, J.)
Concurrence (Iredell, J.)
Concurrence (Cushing, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
