Five pitfalls in case briefing (and how to spot them in your own work)

We read a lot of student briefs while building Scriba. Five patterns account for almost every red-pen mark. Once you can name them, you can catch them in your own writing before you submit.

1. Facts you never use

If a fact appears in F but never comes back in A, delete it. The facts section is not a summary — it’s the setup for the reasoning. Anything the court did not lean on is background, not brief material.

2. The two-sentence rule statement

A rule you cannot say in one sentence is not yet a rule statement. It is a paragraph. Force yourself to condense. “Under X, a party must show A, B, and C” is a rule. “The court considered several factors…” is a summary.

3. Analysis that just restates the rule

Analysis is the court applying the rule to these facts. If your A paragraph would fit any case, it is not analysis — it is another rule statement. The tell: no proper nouns from the fact pattern.

4. Holding as disposition

“The court affirmed” is the disposition. The holding is the rule this case now stands for. What would you cite this case for in a memo two years from now? That’s the holding.

5. Every case briefed the same length

Landmark cases deserve a full page. Cases the professor mentioned in passing deserve four sentences. If every brief is the same length, you’re not making judgments — and making judgments is what the exam tests.

“The brief is a working document. It is not for the professor. It is for the you who has to write an exam in December.”— A 3L, in a study room