Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

Rathke v. MacFarlane Case Brief

Supreme Court of Colorado1982Docket #1536499
648 P.2d 648 1982 Colo. LEXIS 650

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

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: Precious metal dealers sought to block a new state law imposing a 30-day holding period on purchased items. The court denied their request for a preliminary injunction, finding they failed to show a reasonable probability of proving the law was unconstitutional.

Legal Significance: This case establishes the stringent, multi-factor test for granting a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of a criminal statute, clarifying that the movant must show a reasonable probability of succeeding on the merits under the ultimate, heightened burden of proof at trial.

Rathke v. MacFarlane 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

Appellants were merchants engaged in buying and selling precious metals and stones. Their business model depended on the immediate resale of purchased articles to third parties via teletype, with delivery required within 48 hours. This practice allowed them to lock in a fixed profit and avoid market speculation. In 1981, Colorado enacted a statute, C.R.S. § 18-16-101 et seq., to combat trafficking in stolen goods. The law required purchasers of “valuable articles” to record detailed information about each transaction and, crucially, to hold each article for thirty days before resale or alteration. Appellants argued that the 30-day holding period would destroy their business model and constituted an unconstitutional taking of property, among other challenges. They sought a declaratory judgment and filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent the state from enforcing the statute. The trial court found that the appellants demonstrated irreparable injury but denied the preliminary injunction, concluding they had not established a reasonable probability of success on the merits of their constitutional challenge.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction to enjoin the enforcement of a criminal statute by requiring the moving party to establish a reasonable probability of proving the statute unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt?

No. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the 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 fugi

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

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 the trial court abuse its discretion in denying a preliminary injunction to enjoin the enforcement of a criminal statute by requiring the moving party to establish a reasonable probability of proving the statute unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt?

Conclusion

This case provides a key procedural framework in Colorado for parties seeking 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 labor

Legal Rule

To obtain a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of a criminal statute, 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

Legal Analysis

The Supreme Court of Colorado affirmed the trial court's denial of the 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 ali

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • To obtain a preliminary injunction against a criminal statute, a plaintiff
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

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More