MORGOLD, INC. v. KEELER
Paper , Order, or Assignment Requirements
Assignment 4-3: Case Analysis (40 points)
- Download the Word document sent to you by your instructor which includes questions
covering the assigned chapters.
- Insert your answers. BE SURE TO ANSWER IN DEPTH – DEFINE, EXPLAIN,
PROVIDE ANALYSIS TO EARN ALL THE POINTS.
- Save it.
- Go to the Assignment 4-3 in the course, upload the paper using the “Submit” tool
by Sunday of Week Four.
NOTE: Grading Criteria
Evidence of critical-thinking skills: 0 – 20 points
Support your decision with the identification of the appropriate legal issues: 0 – 20 points
Potential point reductions associated with spelling, grammar, and writing style: 0 – 10 points
Assignment 4-4: Case Study (60 points)
****After you have completed everything you read below. Go to the Assignment 4-4 in the
course and upload using the “Submit” tool by Sunday of Week Four.****
READ THE CASE YOU ARE ANALYZING WHICH IS: Morgold, Inc. v Keeler, 891 F.
Supp. 1461 (1995). CONTACT THE LIBRARY TO ASSIST YOU WITH LexisNexis (legal
research company you have free access to) if you need assistance. I wanted to give you practice
looking up a case so you know how to find them. You can also Google it but the proper case
format will be found using LexisNexis.
Complete the sections below and be sure to delete all information in red font. Write a 2- to 3-
page (MINIMUM) research memorandum to the CEO or Executive Director of the Company
for the Case
USE THE MEMO TEMPLATE PROVIDED BY YOUR INSTRUCTOR. Delete the language
in red font.
Structure your memo as follows:
Succinctly state the facts relevant to the resolution of the case you are analyzing. Doing
so involves reviewing the facts to include only those relevant to answering the
question(s) at issue in your memorandum.
State the question or questions your memorandum seeks to answer. If possible, present it
in a single sentence or two (e.g., “Will Mr. Smith have to include the value of the
property in his income?”). Most (if not all) of the memoranda you will be assigned will
present a single, overarching question. Granted, there may be multiple issues that you
have to analyze to answer this question, but all of them go toward answering the larger
question–such as whether the taxpayer has to include the value of some property in his or
State the answer to the “Question(s) Presented” as clearly and succinctly as possible–
again, preferably in a single sentence or a few sentences. (For example, your Short
Answer to the Question Presented above might be, “Mr. Smith will have to include the
value of the property in his income.”)
This is the substantive portion of your memorandum and is worth the majority of the
points on the assignment. It is where you present all of the analysis that is required to
support your Short Answer. In performing your analysis, you should use the general
“IRAC” approach you have learned and utilized to date, although you will not have
specific sections within the Analysis listed as “Issue, ” “Rule, ” “Analysis, ” and
“Conclusion. ” Once you have identified the issue or issues that you have to resolve to
answer the Short Answer, you should address the authority for your position. Your
analysis for each of these issues should review these authorities and then apply them to
the facts of the case to draw conclusions.
Finally, it is very important that you analyze the case from a business perspective and
provide recommendations on how a business could have avoided or mitigated the legal
issue involved in the case. What recommendations will you make to management to
prevent this issue from occurring in the future?
NOTE: Grading Criteria
Demonstrating critical thinking in answering the action items above and
incorporating the answers effectively into a memo: 0 – 40 points
Presentation (flow of ideas and critical thought): 0 – 20 points
Potential point reductions associated with spelling, grammar, and writing style: 0
– 10 points