In legal research, 'CASE LAW ANALYSIS' should examine:

Question

Accepted Answer

C. FACTS, ISSUES, HOLDING, REASONING (ratio), CONCURRENCES/DISSENTS, PRIOR PRECEDENTS RELIED ON, STATUTES INTERPRETED, SUBSEQUENT TREATMENT (followed/distinguished/overruled), CRITICAL COMMENTARY

1. THOROUGH CASE LAW ANALYSIS examines multiple dimensions:
2. (i) FACTS — material facts, parties, timeline;
3. (ii) ISSUES — legal questions addressed;
4. (iii) HOLDING — the operative answer to the questions;
5. (iv) REASONING — RATIO DECIDENDI (binding) and OBITER DICTA (persuasive);
6. (v) CONCURRENCES AND DISSENTS — alternative views;
7. (vi) PRIOR PRECEDENTS RELIED ON — chain of authority;
8. (vii) STATUTES INTERPRETED — relevant law applied;
9. (viii) SUBSEQUENT TREATMENT — followed, distinguished, overruled, doubted;
10. (ix) CRITICAL ACADEMIC COMMENTARY — agreement, criticism;
11. (x) SOCIAL/HISTORICAL CONTEXT;
12. (xi) DOCTRINAL CONTRIBUTION.
13. KeyCite (Westlaw), Shepard's (Lexis), Manupatra's case history tools track subsequent treatment.
14. Hence option B is correct.
_Source: Legal Research Methodology + Jurisprudence — Case law analysis methodology_

Answer

only the operative part (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology)

Answer

only the case heading (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology)

Answer

only the outcome (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology) (cf. Case law analysis methodology)