From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Bangs
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
9 Mass. 387 (1812)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
Bangs (defendant) was indicted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (plaintiff) for procuring an abortion after administering a potion to Lucy Holman that was designed to produce an abortion. The jury found Bangs guilty but concluded that Holman had taken the potion voluntarily. Bangs moved to set aside the judgment on the grounds that the abortion was not successful, that there was no evidence of quickening (fetal movement) at the time Holman took the potion, and that Holman had consented to taking the potion. In response, the Commonwealth argued that any overt act taken with the intent to procure an abortion constituted a misdemeanor and that Holman’s consent was not relevant.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
