在英美判例法的学习过程中，我们会“亲密无间”地接触大量的案例，这些案例少则三四页，多则十几二十几页。要想高效地阅读英文案例，必须要学会撰写Casebrief(案例摘要)，这是在美国法学院“生存”(survival)的必备技能。
Casebrief也是法律英语证书(LEC)考试的考查重点。
Casebrief又称casesummary,是对已公布的案例所作的概述，换言之，是对案件事实和其中法律意见(legalopinion)的总结。
不过，很多人将“casebrief”与“brief”混淆，二者是截然不同的~
而Casebrief不是发表对案件观点，也不需要提交给法院。它是法学院学生用来备课和考试的学习工具，主要作用是帮助快速阅读案例，掌握案例重点，便于以后回顾案件。
Casebrief以精简总结案例事实和法律意见为主，篇幅不宜过长，一页纸左右即可。
如何撰写CaseBrief？
Casebrief有不同的格式，但通常情况下，应包括以下要点：
1.Citation(引称)
Givethefullcitationforthecase,includingthenameofthecase,thedateitwasdecided,andthecourtthatdecidedit.
2Facts(案件事实)
Brieflyindicate
(1)thereasonsforthelawsuit;
(2)theidentityandargumentsoftheplaintiff(s)anddefendant(s),respectively;and
(3)thelowercourt'sdecision,ifappropriate.
3Issue(争议点)
Conciselyphrase,intheformofaquestion,theessentialissuebeforethecourt.Ifmorethanoneissueisinvolved,youmayhavetwoorevenmorequestionshere.
4HoldingorDecision(法庭的判决)
Indicateherewitha"yes"or"no,"ifpossible,thecourt'sanswertothequestion(orquestions)intheIssuesectionabove.
5.RationaleorReasoning(推理过程或判决理由)
Summarizeasbrieflyaspossiblethereasonsgivenbythecourtforitsdecision(ordecisions)andthecaseorstatutorylawreliedonbythecourtinarrivingatitsdecision.
6.RuleofLaw(本案所确立的法律规则)
Insimple,clearlanguage,statethegeneralprinciplethatcausedthecourttodecidethewayitdid,andwhichcanbeappliedtofuturecases.
CaseBriefSample
SonyCorporationofAmericav.UniversalCityStudios,Inc.
UnitedStatesSupremeCourt
464U.S.417(1984)
Facts
SonyCorporationofAmerica(Sony)(defendant)createdavideocassetterecorder(VCR)calledBetamax,whichallowedconsumerstorecordthingsandwatchthemlater,includingcopyrightedtelevisionshowsandmovies.UniversalCityStudios,Inc.,etal.(plaintiffs),copyrightholdersofcertainshowsandmovies,broughtsuit,allegingthatSonywasguiltyofcontributorycopyrightinfringement.Thedistrictcourtfoundthatrecordingashowandwatchingitlater(time-shifting)wasfairusebecauseitmayactuallyincreaseviewershipofcopyrightedprograms,andbecausecontentproducersnotinvolvedinthislitigationwereactuallyinfavorofallowingtime-shiftingtocontinue.Thecourtofappealsreversed,rulinginfavoroftheplaintiffs.Sonyappealed.
Issue
Doesthesaleofarticlesofcommerceconstitutecontributoryinfringementiftheproductiswidelyusedforlegitimate,noninfringinguses
Holding
No.
Reasoning(Stevens,J.)
RuleofLaw
Thesaleofarticlesofcommercedoesnotconstitutecontributoryinfringementiftheproductiswidelyusedforlegitimate,noninfringinguses.