法律英語case1

1、dobson v.masonite corpunited states court of appeals fifth circuit359 f.2d 921(1966) statement of factsltrial courtplaintiff: dobson defendant : masonite corp. lappellate courtappellant :masonite corpappellee :dobsonstatement of factsidentify legally relevant factsin march 1963 ,dobson orally agreed

2、 to undertake cutting operation on masonites lands. so they reached a verbal agreement like this:contract(1)cut all oak timber(2)have complete control over the entire cutting operations(3)sell the cut timber as he could(4)pay m $12 initially,and subsequently $10 per thousand log feet of oak soldso m

3、asonite unilaterally terminated the agreement and ordered dobson to discontinue his operations.however,the price of the oak surged, dobson was able to realize profit from his operations.ldobson continued clearing operations from march 1963 to december 1963, during which time cleared 4,000 acres of l

4、and ,and realized a net profit, after all expenses, including payments to masonite, of l dobson interpreted the contract as one for service; he argued that the agreement was for clearing the land of unwanted oak trees. l mosonite denied liability, interpreting the contract as one for the sales of st

5、anding timber, and invoking the mississippi statute of frauds to bar dobsons claim .b. identify procedurally significant factslegal issueslwhich type of the contract? service or sales dobson masonitelinterpretation question of law or question of factholdingdistrict courtljury in favor of p assess da

6、mages at 26,500ldistrict court question of law contract for sales the contract is unenforceable holdingappeals fifth circuit courtlquestion of fact reversed and remanded with directions rule of lawlthe mississippi statute of fraudslfed. r. civ. p. 50(b)reasoning of the courtdistrict court the legal

7、analysis and legal effect of that done was in question.matter of lawpresented to the judgedobson by virtue of the contract acquired an interest in standing timber.sale contractmississippi statute of fraudsfifth circuit court interpretation is always a question of fact. “l(fā)egal effect” is just the res

8、ult of applying rules of law to the facts.question of factdetermined by the juryunless there was no evidence , the verdict must stand.additionnal commentsmy puzzle: what is the “l(fā)egal effect”?appellate court: legal effect is the result of applying rules of law to the facts.district court:legal effec

9、t is the legal influence of a juridical act. i prefer the appellate courts opinion. because if we choose the district courts idea that anything may lead to legal influence is a matter of law,we would get an amazing interence - there is no need for the jury. for example: in criminal cases,the jury determine whether the defendant is guilty.this determination itself obviously lead to legal influence . in order to protect the jury system,we should support the holding of the appellate court. (if it is in china,things may be totally different.in chinse