Connection lost
Server error
Al-Ibrahim v. Edde Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
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: An employee sued his employer to enforce an oral contract for reimbursement of taxes paid on the employer’s gambling winnings, which the employee had illegally claimed as his own. The court refused to enforce the illegal contract, leaving the parties as it found them.
Legal Significance: This case powerfully illustrates the public policy doctrine that courts will not enforce contracts predicated on illegal acts, such as tax fraud. It demonstrates the narrowness of exceptions like in pari delicto and the judiciary’s refusal to aid parties to an illicit agreement.
Al-Ibrahim v. Edde 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
George Edde (Counterclaimant) was employed as a companion to Sheikh Al-Ibrahim (Plaintiff). The Sheikh, a high-stakes gambler, allegedly required Edde to claim the Sheikh’s substantial gambling winnings as his own on documents submitted to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Edde asserted that he understood this was a condition of his employment. The Sheikh orally promised to reimburse Edde for any resulting tax liability. After Edde resigned, the IRS pursued him for unpaid taxes on the winnings. Edde negotiated a settlement with the IRS and paid approximately $400,000 in back taxes, interest, and penalties. Throughout this process, Edde never informed the IRS that the winnings actually belonged to the Sheikh. When the Sheikh refused to reimburse him as promised, Edde filed a counterclaim for breach of contract and restitution. The Sheikh moved to dismiss the counterclaim, arguing it was based on an illegal contract.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Can a party enforce an oral contract or seek restitution when the agreement’s subject matter requires the commission of an illegal act, specifically defrauding the Internal Revenue Service?
No. The court granted the motion to dismiss the counterclaims for breach 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
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Can a party enforce an oral contract or seek restitution when the agreement’s subject matter requires the commission of an illegal act, specifically defrauding the Internal Revenue Service?
Conclusion
This case serves as a classic example of the "unclean hands" and 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 nis
Legal Rule
A contract to perform an illegal act is void and unenforceable as 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
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on the well-established principle that courts will not 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. 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 o
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A court will not enforce a contract to perform an illegal