McNulty v. Cusack Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A driver was rear-ended while stopped at a red light. The court held this created a rebuttable presumption of negligence, and since the defendant offered no explanation, a directed verdict for the plaintiff on liability was proper.
Legal Significance: Establishes the “rear-end collision presumption” in Florida: a rear-end collision creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence against the following driver, shifting the burden of producing exculpatory evidence to them.
McNulty v. Cusack Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Annie B. Cusack was operating her vehicle and came to a complete stop at an intersection in observance of a red traffic light. While lawfully stopped, her car was struck from behind by a vehicle driven by the defendant, F. Jerome McNulty. At the scene, McNulty apologized for the collision. At trial, the plaintiff testified to these facts. The defendant, however, presented no evidence and offered no explanation for why his vehicle collided with the plaintiff’s stationary car. After the plaintiff rested her case, the defendant also rested. The trial court then granted a directed verdict for the plaintiff on the issue of liability, submitting only the question of damages to the jury, which returned a verdict for the plaintiff.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a rear-end collision with a vehicle lawfully stopped at a traffic signal, without any explanation from the defendant, create a rebuttable presumption of negligence sufficient to warrant a directed verdict on liability for the plaintiff?
Yes. The court affirmed the directed verdict for the plaintiff, holding that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does a rear-end collision with a vehicle lawfully stopped at a traffic signal, without any explanation from the defendant, create a rebuttable presumption of negligence sufficient to warrant a directed verdict on liability for the plaintiff?
Conclusion
This case solidifies a significant, plaintiff-friendly evidentiary rule in tort law, streamlining Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolor
Legal Rule
When a defendant's vehicle strikes the rear of a plaintiff's vehicle that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commod
Legal Analysis
The court resolved a split of authority by choosing to treat a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A rear-end collision creates a rebuttable presumption of negligence against the