80 likes | 210 Vues
This chapter examines the distinction between mandatory authority, which is binding law from higher courts, and persuasive authority, which is valid but not from higher courts. It discusses key cases such as *Heatherridge Management Company v. Benson*, revealing the implications of a landlord’s authority in withholding security deposits. The analysis underscores the importance of understanding citation formats and how to effectively reference cases in legal contexts, thereby aiding legal practitioners and students in navigating complex judicial precedents.
E N D
Chapter 4Citing Authority Mandatory Authority = Valid law from higher authority Persuasive Authority = Valid law not from higher authority
HEATHERRIDGE MANAGEMENT COMPANY v. BENSON Colo. 435 Cite as, Colo. 558 P.2d 435 HEATHERRIDGE MANAGEMENT COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Patrick BENSON, Respondent. No. C-756 Supreme Court of Colorado En Banc. Dec. 6, 1976 Rehearing Denied Jan. 24, 1977. Tenant brought action seeking recovery of security deposit, treble damages, and attorneys’ fees from landlord who alledegedly wrongfully withheld security deposit. The evidence supported a finding that the landlord’s leasing agent released tenant from last two months of his lease obligation and had apparent authority to do so. Affirmed. Cite as: Heatherridge Management Co. v. Benson, 558 P.2d 435 (Colo. 1976) 1. Check above the caption for parallel citations 230 Neb. 842 SECURITY STATE BANK, A Nebraska Banking Banking Corporation, Appellant, v. Raymond L. GUGELMAN, Appellee. 2. If no parallel citation, Shepardize 3. Citation form in publication may be incorrect 4. Title = capitalized letters of case Real World Citations
Pinpoint Citations • Pinpointing = locating quote within case Smith v. Jones, 930 F.2d 308 (8th Cir. 1998) Pinpoint: Smith v. Jones, 930 F.2d 308, 315 (8th Cir. 1998) Quote is found on page 315 of volume 930 of Federal Reporter, 2d series
Pinpoint this case to 67: Alcorn v. Smith, 781 F.2d 58, 67 (6th Cir. 1986)
Parallel Pinpoint In re Jones, 98 Nev. 113, 351 P.2d 714 (1979) Pinpoint Citation: In re Jones, 98 Nev. 113, 115, 351 P.2d 714, 717 (1979) • Supra Used for cases fully cited above in text In Smith v. Jones, 584 F.2d 431 (4th Cir. 1989), the court held: … the court cannot provide relief when the Plaintiff fails to state ca claim upon which relief can be granted. Smith, supra. at 436. OR 584 F.2d at 436 OR Id. at 436
Star PaginationProvides parallel pagination cite*115*[115][343 U.S. 115]Indicates where page begins in official publicationOfficial Publication Unofficial Publication