Connection lost
Server error
DALTON v. EDUC. TESTING SERV. 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: ETS breached its contract with a test-taker by failing to consider his evidence in good faith when questioning his SAT score. The court ordered ETS to reconsider the evidence, not to release the score.
Legal Significance: Affirms the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in standardized testing contracts, requiring genuine consideration of a test-taker’s evidence, but limits judicial remedy to enforcing contractual process, not dictating substantive outcomes.
DALTON v. EDUC. TESTING SERV. 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
Brian Dalton’s SAT score increased 410 points between two sittings. Educational Testing Service (ETS), per its contract (Registration Bulletin), questioned the validity due to the large score difference and disparate handwriting analysis. The contract allowed Dalton to submit additional information. Dalton provided evidence including medical documentation for his first test performance, consistent diagnostic test results from a prep course, proctor and student statements confirming his presence at the second test, and a handwriting expert’s report concluding he authored both answer sheets. ETS, after review by its Board of Review and a second handwriting expert who concurred with the first, maintained its decision to cancel the score. The trial court found ETS failed to act in good faith by not genuinely evaluating Dalton’s submitted information, believing his presence irrelevant and only a retest could validate the score. The Appellate Division affirmed, finding ETS ignored Dalton’s documentation. Both lower courts ordered ETS to release the score.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did ETS breach its contractual obligation, including the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, by failing to genuinely consider relevant information submitted by the test-taker to validate a questioned SAT score, and if so, is the appropriate remedy specific performance compelling release of the score or compelling good-faith reconsideration?
Yes, ETS breached its contract by failing to consider in good faith 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
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
Did ETS breach its contractual obligation, including the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, by failing to genuinely consider relevant information submitted by the test-taker to validate a questioned SAT score, and if so, is the appropriate remedy specific performance compelling release of the score or compelling good-faith reconsideration?
Conclusion
This case underscores that the implied covenant of good faith requires genuine, 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. Ex
Legal Rule
Implicit in all contracts is a covenant of good faith and fair 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 off
Legal Analysis
The Court of Appeals held that Dalton's agreement with ETS, embodied in 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 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
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A contract between a test-taker and a testing agency (like ETS)