Read this essay, “How to Read a Case” by Prof. Julie Novkov of SUNY at Albany, and this NY Court of Appeals decision, People v. Neulander. By 9am Thursday, March 4, post a “reply” to this post in which you do TWO THINGS: (1) Write a short response and/or question about the essay that shows you read and thought about it! (2) Answer any ONE of questions 1-4 in the essay (including the “bullet point” subquestions beneath it) as it applies to People v. Neulander. This assignment will not be accepted late. đ Optional: For extra insight on reading court decisions, check out these sources from Roosevelt University and FindLaw!
LAW 1201 Legal Research I!! S21
A City Tech OpenLab Course Site
Hello everyone,
After reading the “How to Read a Case” assignment I decided to save it to my word documents. I feel like it can be a helpful reference moving forward in the law program to help me decipher cases. Two things I took from the reading were that some cases have different judges opinions and they can range from majority opinion, concurring opinion, plurality opinion, and dissenting opinion. From cases I have previously read I have seen every opinion except plurality. According to the reading plurality opinion is “when a panel of judges is unable to produce a majority opinion because they are divided over reasons for an outcome that the majority supports. In this situation the lead opinion is a plurality opinion, which has less value as precedent than a majority opinion for the court. I thought I should share that with the class because I did not know that.
I will be using question 2. What are the facts of the case?
– The respondent in this case is the people of New York. The charges against the appellant are murder and evidence tampering. The remedy being sought is conviction of these crimes and not to overturn the decision
– The appellant was Robert Neulander. The appeal his attorney presented was juror misconduct and that it warrants a reversal of judgment of the appellants conviction of murder and evidence tampering.
– Throughout the case even though there was substantial evidence against the appellant the Court of Appeals leaned towards the fact the appellant did not have a proper trial due to juror 12’s misconduct. They brought up precedent from a previous case, “Nothing is more basic to the criminal process than the right of an accused to a trial by an impartial jury. It is also stated that juror 12 violated the instructions of the court.
(1). The essay was helpful, at first I read the case then the essay and later went back to the case. Even though it sounds like a lot of work this benefitted me because I was able to get a feel for what the case was about and the essay helped me to know what to look for to comprehend it. For example, at first I did not understand the legal issue after reading the essay I asked myself a few of the questions presented and it helped to comprehend the whole case
Question #1
* People v. Neulander takes places in New York, and is a state case.
* The case was decided on October 22, 2019.
*This case is at the intermediate appellate level.
* I would’ve better understood the case if I knew the papers jurors sign, and what it
states so that i know what juror 22 violated.
* Terms: Prevarication, egregiousness.
When reading “How to read a case”, I believe it was very interesting and helpful.One thing I found interesting was when it came to separate opinions. To know that if a court divides evenly due to the fact a judge was sitting out a case , that it would just use the lower courts decision sounds like a waste of time to everyone involved. Why wouldn’t they have an alternative “tie breaker”?
What are the facts of the case?
Appellant People V defendant Robert Neulander
The case argues whether or not the misconduct of a juror warrants a reversal judgment that convicted the defendant of killing his wife and tampering with evidence. Juror number 12 was dishonest as they were deleting text messages that was proof that they where conversing with people about the case.Also they deleted the internet browser which was proof they were reading up on the media about the case.
1. The “How to read a case” essay is very interesting to me because it has me thinking differently on how I should be reading future cases. Before this essay I felt as if I had just a simple and basic reading comprehension level to understanding the cases and that was all I needed but the part where she explains that I also need to understand “how the case fits into the larger context of a line of doctrine on a particular issue” has me reconsidering my approach on how to read future cases. I definitely will take this view into account for future case readings.
2. What is the background of this case?
– This case is from New York and is considered a state case.
– October 22, 2019 is when this case was decided.
– The level that this case is at is at the Intermediate Appellate Court level.
– The legal terms in the case that I’m not too sure on would be what exactly the juror texted that violated her sworn oath as a juror.
Hello all!
Reading this article, I found everything about it useful and will keep it around for future reference. It is almost of a check list to make sure I stay on path and annotate the cases as I am looking at them and not just reading– anyone can do that. Instead of just reading at the same time you are asking questions that would better make anyone understand the case.
What are the facts of the case?
â˘The plaintiff/Appellate in this case is Dr. Robert Neulander vs the People. He is appealing the verdict that was made against him due to the trail court’s abuse of power when denying his motion to set aside the verdict after finding a juror misconduct. He is seeking that the verdict be dismissed and be entitled to a new trail.
⢠According tot Dr. Neulander’s lawyers, there were able to proved that juror number 12 was exchanging text messages and search browsers about the case. When brought up to the attention of the court they dismissed the allegations and continued. Abusing Dr. Neulander’s constitutional rights to a fair trail.
⢠The Appellate division believed that the lower courts did abuse their power when they fail to address the problematic juror and that the juror did engage in misconduct. A new trial must be granted.
1. As I was reading “How to Read A Case”, the methods that they provided reminded me of the IRAC method that I use for my assignments in Real Estate Law. In the essay it shows you how to break down the case into several layers. Similarly, the IRAC method also allows you to divide a case into different sections in order to identify the main idea.
2. “What is the background of the case?”
⢠The case occurred in the State of New York Court of Appeals.
⢠The case was decided on October 22, 2019
⢠The level of the case is a district court case
⢠A legal term that I forgot the definition of is affidavit.
After reading ” how to read a case” it kind of made under the ” People v. Neulander”. It really helps you think and break down the case as your reading. Thats why I believe is always good to annotate while reading. Annotating while reading helps you not forget your thoughts, questions, answers and etc. Reading case I feel like its hard but not really because it basic comprehension, but then again you have to really shit there and try to pretend this is you and put yourself in their shoes to really get the feeling of the case. Thats how i usually do it to make it not so boring, because reading a case can be very boring. However, I had a few questions? If there is a juror misconduct who has the right to call for a new jury? Also, does the jury face disciplinary actions ?
2. What is the background of this case?
-A NewYork State case
-October,22,2019 they decided the case
-Appellate Court level was intermediate
-Juror 12 voliated the law . she under oath. deleted evidence . and spoke about case
After reading ” how to read a case” it kind of made under the ” People v. Neulander”. It really helps you think and break down the case as your reading. Thats why I believe is always good to annotate while reading. Annotating while reading helps you not forget your thoughts, questions, answers and etc. Reading case I feel like its hard but not really because it basic comprehension, but then again you have to really shit there and try to pretend this is you and put yourself in their shoes to really get the feeling of the case. Thats how i usually do it to make it not so boring, because reading a case can be very boring. However, I had a few questions? If there is a juror misconduct who has the right to call for a new jury? Also, does the jury face disciplinary actions ?
2. What is the background of this case?
-A NewYork State case
-October,22,2019 they decided the case
-Appellate Court level was intermediate
-Juror 12 voliated the law . she under oath. deleted evidence . and spoke about case
– The reading âHow to Caseâ is a very interesting law excerpt. Itâs actually a reading that I am going to look at more often as the semester goes for my law courses and hopefully in the future as i pursue being in the law field. For example things Iâve found interesting in this reading was the concept of âreasons by analogyâ The example that was given was the if the facts in this case are similar enough to the facts in previous cases to warrant deciding the case in the same way. What I found interesting was that courts could go back to any case at any given time and could use facts from the case to come to a conclusion.
– Question 4 What reasoning supports the court decision. Some of the reasonings that supports the courtâs decision in this case is that juror 12 in this case was according to this case report ârepeatedly and deliberately untruthfulâ during this case. Another reasoning presented that can back the courtâs decision of an improper trial was that juror 12 also the people even thought that juror 12 also engaged in misconduct during the trial. The misconduct was âoverweighted by the substantial proof of guilt presented at the trialâ
Response (1): One of the most important aspects of Law is fully deciphering former cases in order to understand a current case. This is because there are so many details that may seem minute however they serve a huge purpose to the overall task. Another keypoint that Novkov mentions is that it is vital to not only understand a judgeâs ruling but also why they ruled the way they did as it often tells a much bigger picture. Novkov writes a blueprint for what actual Legal Research entails and why it is necessary to be detailed and organized.
Response (2): The legal question that the State of New York Court of Appeals is asked to answer is basically whether or not proven juror misconduct means automatic reversal of a judgment. This case involved an individual named Dr. Neulander who was convivted for the murder of his wife, during the trial it was revealed that juror 12 was discussing the case with outside people and also researching various opinions on the case from the media. As a result Dr. Neulander was basically awarded a retrial from the original court. The Court of Appeals rules that the judgement should not be reversed but that the defendant does in fact deserve a retrial as they are entitled to a trial with jurors that follow the courts directions who don’t run into circumstances where they could be persuaded. In other words, the court realizes that a retrial is necessary but does not reverse the judgment as one dishonest juror does not defile the entire decision.
Response (1): One of the most important aspects of Law is fully deciphering former cases in order to understand a current case. This is because there are so many details that may seem minute however they serve a huge purpose to the overall task. Another keypoint that Novkov mentions is that it is vital to not only understand a judgeâs ruling but also why they ruled the way they did as it often tells a much bigger picture. Novkov writes a blueprint for what actual Legal Research entails and why it is necessary to be detailed and organized.
Response (2): The legal question that the State of New York Court of Appeals is asked to answer is basically whether or not proven juror misconduct means automatic reversal of a judgment. This case involved an individual named Dr. Neulander who was convivted for the murder of his wife, during the trial it was revealed that juror 12 was discussing the case with outside people and also researching various opinions on the case from the media. As a result Dr. Neulander was basically awarded a retrial from the original court. The Court of Appeals rules that the judgement should not be reversed but that the defendant does in fact deserve a retrial as they are entitled to a trial with jurors that follow the courts directions who don’t run into circumstances where they could be persuaded. In other words, the court realizes that a retrial is necessary but does not reverse the judgment as one dishonest juror does not defile the entire decision.
When I finished reading “How to read a case” I was glad we were assigned this reading because it was very useful. Especially since I would be using this in a long term profession, I felt like it was extremely effective. Both law classes have made us read cases and just being able to read this was helpful. It explained things that I didnât understand well. The reading states, âOccasionally, a panel of judges is unable to produce a majority opinion because they are divided over the reasons for an outcome that the majority supports. In this situation, the lead opinion is a plurality opinion, which has less value as precedent than a majority opinion for the court.â Honestly, that was very helpful to me because I was able to understand more on what happens for certain cases.
1. What is the background of the case?
– The case is from New York and itâs a state case.
– The case was decided on October 22, 2019.
– The case was at an intermediate level and it was an Appellate court case.
– The legal terms that I didnât understand in this case would be CPL 330.30
1.) The essay âhow to read a caseâ is a good format for how to brief cases before I had a very basic outlook on it. And this essay has giving the tools to read a case in full depth and understand every aspect of it.
2.) New York State Court
Decided on October 29, 2019
Intermediate Appellate Court
Juror 12 violated law . She under oath deleted evidence. And spoke about the case
After reading “How to read a Case” by Prof. Julie Novkov I realized I how superficial I had been reading cases so far. In her article she discussed how rather than just reading to understand the judge’s ruling, we should sense how the case fits into the larger context of the discussed subject. In order to get the most understanding out of a case she gives us various questions for us to use as a guide to digging deeper.
1. What is the background of the case?
-This is a New York State case
-They decided the case on October 22, 2019
-This was an Intermediate Appellate Court case.
-There wasn’t any legal terms that I didn’t understand.
When reading “how to read a case”, I believe it is very helpful and very informative. From reading this essay I had learned that not all the time judges can follow the previous decision of past cases, they can distinguish the previous case meaning explaining why decision would not apply on that case. Learning that facts are very important in deciting the similiraties and difference between cases. However, when it comes to understanding the context of a case, if a future judge at the same level is deciding a case with similiar basic facts, the judge s bound to follow the earlier precedent and that is the priciple of stare decisis or the idea that under normal circumstances, once an issue has been comfirmed it should not be revisited.
1) what is the background of the case?
-The case is from New York and it is a state case.
-The case was decided on October 22,2019
– The level the case is at is in appelate division meaning that it is New York’s intermediate level appelate court.
– Terms I didnt understand were admonishment and inadvertent misstatement
I really loved this article and felt it was super helpful in all of its tips on how to properly read and annotate a case. It, in essence, helps give you the proper mindset going into a reading, having things to look for rather than just reading it for any piece of information you can find. I love how we are given the suggestion of using different highlighter pens to mark different points in the case. I feel personally, using different colors to match with the different questions asked would help me to sort out my thoughts. I love the questions to look for that are given because it really puts you in the right headspace-it helps you look at the context, facts, legal question and reasoning, and different opinions as well as looking at it on a larger level. Reading cases with these points in mind is definitely going to help me understand cases I read much better, and get more out of it.
What is the background of this case?
ď This case is initially from the lower appellate court, the 4th department in New York. Dr. Neulander, had appealed the decision against him made in the decision of People v. Neulander at the trial level, stating that there was jury misconduct and thus a fair trial had not been held. It appears that the People of NY appealed the decision in his favor, thus bringing it to the Court of Appeals.
ď The case was decided October 22, 2019
ď This case is at the highest Appellate level, the Court of Appeals.
ď In this case, the court looks into whether or not a reversal is warranted when they decided that jury misconduct led to an unfair trial, which is unconstitutional. It decides whether or not Dr. Neulander should be entitled to a new trial with an impartial jury.
1) The article provides a great understanding of, not only how to read a case efficiently but also how to draft a case brief. Each point of the article identifies and goes over one part or another of the case brief. While the article focuses on enhancing one’s reading skills what I found more interesting about it is how the language was simple and clear. It provides guidelines that are easy to follow, the article also explains the importance of doctrines like stare decisis to the justice system as a whole.
2) Le legal question, in People v. Neulander the court seems to be centering its analysis around the question of whether jury misconduct in a case warrants a reversal of a murder conviction judgment under (People v Branch, 46
NY2d 645, 652 [1979]) ? Le legal question the court tried to answer is whether an accused has the right to an impartial, to the question the Court Appeals answered yes, affirming the lower appellate court decision. Yes, the legal answer fits together convincingly. See: People v Branch, 46
NY2d 645, 652 [1979], People v Neulander, 162 AD3d 1763, 1768 [4th Dept 2018] People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230, 238 [1975]).
Aaliyah
How to Read a Case
The average college student is familiar with Reading; however, Case reading is in a category of its own. In case reading we are not just looking for the main point and details, but we are considering precedent cases that may apply to the details of the current case. One should always consider previous decisions that can or may have influenced the outcome of this case. Facts of a case are important and should be noted when reading.
US Supreme Court decisions are binding on all federal courts, but circuit court decisions only apply within their geographic circuit (though judges in one circuit may read decisions made by other circuit courts and may even adopt another courtâs reasoning) I personally wanted to note this since I was having trouble with this the other day.
There are 6 tips when doing this type of reading.
Background, Facts, legal question & decision, justification of decision, differing opinions from the decision, and what in what way does this decision affect other cases or what precedent does this case set. Each of these points go into more detail of course.
Q. In a case brief when recording separate opinions is it called dissent? I donât know if this is the word but, in the document kelo vs new England we saw other supreme court judges options.
Q. When we say âthat judge is bound to follow the earlier precedent.â When we use the word bound here is it bound = likely or bound = must adhere to
Who is the plaintiff? Correct me if Iâm wrong does plaintiff and defendant get turned around when if the defendant appeals? Although, Neulander is on trial for murder he becomes the plaintiff in the appellate court or appellant because he claims etcâŚ
What did the plaintiff claim as his legal injury? He is claiming due to the misconduct of the juror he did not have a fare and impartial trail
What kind of remedy was he seeking from the court? Another trial
⢠Who is the defendant? What kind of defense did she present against the plaintiffâs claims? The defendant is the prosecutor I guess the state they believed that the misconduct of the juror was not enough to change the result of the case as there was more than enough evidence to convict him.
⢠What side did the court seem to find to be more convincing? They were in favor of Neulander because it ment that every trial after had to be fair
Aaliyah
How to Read a Case
The average college student is familiar with Reading; however, Case reading is in a category of its own. In case reading we are not just looking for the main point and details, but we are considering precedent cases that may apply to the details of the current case. One should always consider previous decisions that can or may have influenced the outcome of this case. Facts of a case are important and should be noted when reading.
US Supreme Court decisions are binding on all federal courts, but circuit court decisions only apply within their geographic circuit (though judges in one circuit may read decisions made by other circuit courts and may even adopt another courtâs reasoning) I personally wanted to note this since I was having trouble with this the other day.
There are 6 tips when doing this type of reading.
Background, Facts, legal question & decision, justification of decision, differing opinions from the decision, and what in what way does this decision affect other cases or what precedent does this case set. Each of these points go into more detail of course.
Q. In a case brief when recording separate opinions is it called dissent? I donât know if this is the word but, in the document kelo vs new England we saw other supreme court judges options.
Q. When we say âthat judge is bound to follow the earlier precedent.â When we use the word bound here is it bound = likely or bound = must adhere to
Who is the plaintiff? Correct me if Iâm wrong does plaintiff and defendant get turned around when if the defendant appeals? Although, Neulander is on trial for murder he becomes the plaintiff in the appellate court or appellant because he claims etcâŚ
What did the plaintiff claim as his legal injury? He is claiming due to the misconduct of the juror he did not have a fare and impartial trail
What kind of remedy was he seeking from the court? Another trial
⢠Who is the defendant? What kind of defense did she present against the plaintiffâs claims? The defendant is the prosecutor I guess the state they believed that the misconduct of the juror was not enough to change the result of the case as there was more than enough evidence to convict him.
⢠What side did the court seem to find to be more convincing? They were in favor of Neulander because it ment that every trial after had to be fair