Holdings and "What's the Answer"

Students often have the most difficulty in arriving at a 'holding' in their brief. This is often the point at which students approach their professors and ask "Did I get the holding right?" or "What's the answer?"

The "answer" to all legal questions is the same: IT DEPENDS. What the holding of a case is depends on how you interpret the result of the case in light of the facts and the court's reasoning. Students must understand that a holding is not the same as a 'rule', which is the law the court applies to the facts in the case to reach the holding. It is also different than the court's 'rationale' for why it chose to apply the rule in the way it did. Over time, a series of 'holdings' in related cases, crystallize into 'rules'. Even when the court says "We hold..." the statement they make may not be what develops into the "holding" of the case as other courts apply that case.

So there is no there is no "right or wrong" holding -- only interpretations of cases that are more strongly supported and better reasoned that others -- and when is a particular interpretation "better reasoned"? IT DEPENDS on the use you wish to make of the holding. If you are defending someone for whom the interpretation of a holding will be favorable precedent and you can make a good argument that interpretation is correct, that is the better holding. If you are trying to predict how a future court will apply a case, the interpretation that results in a holding that best predicts the future is the "better" holding --- at least until the future changes.

Here is one way of looking at a holding that can help to reflect the complexity of this concept.

Suppose a court has a case in which A discovers that B has a son who requires a special operation. Out of the goodness of A's heart, A pays for the operation. B discovers A's generosity and then promises to pay for A's education. B later reneges on the promise, just as A is about to finish the degree program and begin a teaching job. The court finds that B has no legal obligation to pay for A's education (the result). The holding might be phrased as follows:

Functional Result:

The Court will not grant restitution to a Plaintiff who performs a Defendant's obligation...

Facts Tending to Lead to Result
AT LEAST IF:

1) Defendant has not requested Plaintiff to perform the obligation

2) Plaintiff and Defendant have not entered into a contract under which Defendant agreed to reimburse Plaintiff

3) There existed an alternative remedy through which someone could have required Defendant to perform its obligation itself

Facts Tending to Lead to Opposite Result
EVEN THOUGH:

1) Defendant did have the obligation

2) Performance of the obligation was of great public importance

3) Plaintiff performed Defendant's obligation

4) Plaintiff's performance of the obligation conferred a benefit on Defendant.

5) Plaintiff had an obligation (e.g. teaching contract) which could not be performed unless Defendant's obligation was performed

Facts Tending to Mitigate the Effect of the "Even Though" Facts
AT LEAST SO LONG AS:

1) Plaintiff was not an intended beneficiary of the statute or contract (or other source) creating Defendant's obligation

2) Plaintiff has some other remedy for any damage Plaintiff suffered by reason of his inability to perform his obligation (e.g. teaching contract).
The Importance of Vocabulary

It is tempting for students to gloss over words they don't understand. Many professional schools students have developed their vocabulary to the point that, when faced with unfamiliar words, they simply guess meaning from context and let it go at that. They have gotten out of the dictionary habit. In law school, while guessing meaning from context is not a bad first step, the dictionary habit is critical. Every word you pass over (whether legal or not) creates a hole in your understanding that has a cumulative effect on your ability to master the material.

The study of law revolves around the learning of a whole new language. Some legal words are foreign looking and sounding (for example, "res judicata" "mens rea"); others look like words you think you know (judgment, reasonableness, intent) but have peculiar and complex legal meaning. Often the meaning of these terms is the critical issue in interpreting cases and statutes. The fact that separate (very voluminous) dictionaries exist for legal terms should indicate to you the importance of acquiring and mastering a legal vocabulary.

Thus, a critical part of your daily class preparation should include looking up and striving to understand the definitions for every and any unfamiliar word. At first, this will mean that you will be stopping to look up words nearly every other sentence. Take heart. As the semester progresses and your legal vocabulary expands, however, you will be find fewer and fewer unfamiliar words.

The task of becoming skillful in case analysis is indeed difficult and time consuming. It may take hours to comprehend a single opinion. If you apply yourself diligently, however, and if you have a realistic outlook of what must be done, you will find that the time needed to handle opinions will tend to decrease. What will increase from this approach will be your satisfaction in being able to use case law effectively in the resolution of legal problems.