From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Lind v. Schenley Industries
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
278 F.2d 79 (1960)
- Written by Matt Fyock, JD
Facts
Lind (plaintiff) sued his employer Schenley (defendant) for alleged breach of an oral promise for an increase in pay. Both Lind and his former secretary testified that the promise had been made. The jury returned a verdict for Lind, and Schenley moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and, alternatively, a new trial. The trial judge granted the motion because it found the jury’s verdict contrary to the weight of the evidence.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Biggs, C.J.)
Dissent (Hastie, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 779,000 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.
