COALITION FOR EQUITABLE MINORITY PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURAL CONTRACTS IN TENNESSEE (COMPACT) McKissack and McKissack and Thompson, Architects and Engineers, Inc. L. Quincy Jackson and Ronald M. Harris and Donald T. Harris v. METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT OF NASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE Richard H. Fulton Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority Robert C.H. Mathews, Jr. John H. Dewitt Miller Lanier Frank Gorrell Toby Wilt David K. Wilson James T. Fulghum William Moore Metropolitan Board of Education of Davidson County, Tennessee Kent M. Weeks Dorothy A. Gupton Pat Bentrup C. Dewey Branstetter, Jr. Isaac Northern, Jr. June J. Lambert N. Tom Hightower Charles E. Gann Vern Denney Charles Frazier Bill W. Wise Hart-Freeland-Roberts, Inc., Architects and Engineers Batey M. Gresham and Fleming W. Smith, Jr. [1986]
786 F.2d 227 · Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · United States
Issue
What Contracts issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Exam use
Summary
What Contracts issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Facts
Issue
What Contracts issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion?
Held
Source-linked holding checkpoint: the search record does not safely provide the full dispositive holding. Confirm the judgment in the linked source before using this case as controlling authority.
Ratio Decidendi
Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome.
Reasoning
Essay-Ready Explanation Generator
Version 1 of 4
Reference to COALITION FOR EQUITABLE MINORITY PARTICIPATION IN ARCHITECTURAL CONTRACTS IN TENNESSEE (COMPACT) McKissack and McKissack and Thompson, Architects and Engineers, Inc. L. Quincy Jackson and Ronald M. Harris and Donald T. Harris v. METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT OF NASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON COUNTY, TENNESSEE Richard H. Fulton Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority Robert C.H. Mathews, Jr. John H. Dewitt Miller Lanier Frank Gorrell Toby Wilt David K. Wilson James T. Fulghum William Moore Metropolitan Board of Education of Davidson County, Tennessee Kent M. Weeks Dorothy A. Gupton Pat Bentrup C. Dewey Branstetter, Jr. Isaac Northern, Jr. June J. Lambert N. Tom Hightower Charles E. Gann Vern Denney Charles Frazier Bill W. Wise Hart-Freeland-Roberts, Inc., Architects and Engineers Batey M. Gresham and Fleming W. Smith, Jr. (786 F.2d 227) strengthens a Contracts answer because the case reflects the principle that Use this case as a source-verified research checkpoint rather than an invented rule statement. The ratio should be extracted from the linked opinion by identifying the legal test applied, the facts treated as decisive, and the court's stated reason for the outcome. Applied to a problem question, the case should be used after identifying the issue as What Contracts issue does the source record raise, and how should a student verify the rule, holding, and factual trigger from the linked opinion? The stronger essay move is to connect the material facts to the court's holding, then explain whether the present facts support the same conclusion or justify distinguishing the authority.
Underlying Concepts
- contract-law
- Contracts
- source verification
- case research
- exam authority table
Significance
Related Cases
No related cases listed.
Exam Tips
Revision Checklist
- Name the issue before discussing facts so the marker sees the legal question immediately.
- State the holding in one sentence, then use the ratio to explain why the court reached that result.
- Use the citation and jurisdiction to show why this authority matters for the problem you are answering.
- Pair this case with one supporting or contrasting authority if the question tests limits, policy, or exceptions.