Organizing Your Legal Analysis

Using I.R.A.C.

Issue

Rule

Application

Conclusion

The Legal Method

Remember on the first day of class, I told you that there is a method for thinking and writing like a lawyer.

And that while content is also important, the legal method is equally if not more important.

I.R.A.C.

This legal method is represented by an acronym:

IssueRule Application Conclusion

The Elements of IRAC

I is for Identifying the Issue (some lawyers prefer a short conclusion of the problem- CRAC)

– This is an introduction which briefs the reader on the precise issue which you are about to discuss.

– Typically, this introduction will take one or two sentences.

IRAC EXAMPLE

ISSUE

The issue is whether Howard Gavin committed legal malpractice by failing to file a timely notice of appeal in his representation of Linda Pyle.

R stands for Rule Identification.

You should next inform the reader of the pertinent law to the client’s situation in accordance with weight of authority.

From where might the rule of law be derived?

R stands for Rule Identification.

1) If the rule is derived from a case: – and the facts are important, prepare a case discussion.– and the facts are unimportant, prepare a rule sentence.

Both rule sentences and case discussions may be helpful

2) If the rule is derived from a statute, quote the statute and identify the elements.

3 Steps in Preparing Case Discussions

1) Introduce the case and set the stage by giving a sentence or two of the relevant facts:

In Jacobson (citation), the lawyer failed to file a timely claim before the medical malpractice screening panel. The deadline had been provided in the statute and contained in the panel rules sent to all litigants’ attorneys.

Preparing Case Discussions

2) Give the court’s holding:

The court held that a lawyer has a duty to provide a client with representation that meets or exceeds the standard of professional skill and diligence “commonly possessed and exercised by a reasonably prudent lawyer in that jurisdiction.” (citation)

Preparing Case Discussions

3) Give helpful reasoning:

The court found that, because a reasonably prudent lawyer in that jurisdiction would have known the deadline, the lawyer had committed legal malpractice, and awarded damages to the client. (citation)

Remember !Rule sentences, case discussions of

precedent cases and statutory rule paragraphs all go in the rule section.

If you have sub-issues, or elements of a rule,you will use IRAC to discuss and apply each of those as well.

A stands for . . .

Application of the Rule

The heart of analysis is this application of the law to your client’s facts.

Demonstrate how your facts meet the factual conditions in the element of the rule of law or the case you have cited.

Application to the facts

In the instant case, Gavin failed to timely file a notice of appeal with the Court of Claims. Like the medical malpractice screening panel, the Court of Claims has deadlines for filing certain notices. These deadlines are provided in the statute, contained in the court rules and posted in the court clerk’s office.

Any counter-arguments go at the end of the respective application.

Applying Cases in the Application Section:

– You should compare the facts of your case with the facts of the precedent cases;

– draw links between the law and facts;

– make references to important similarities/ differences with cases.

– This is called reasoning by analogy

When Applying Facts to Statutory Elements

– Make references to important words in the statute.

– Discuss separately the application of the facts to each element in the statute.

– Discuss any relevant counter-arguments or policy considerations.

C is for Conclusion:

Your IRAC discussion should close with a statement of whether the requirements of the element have orcan not be met.

The conclusion is grounded in prior analysis of law, precedent and facts.

Conclusion

Therefore, like the court in Jacobson, the court would likely find that Gavin committed legal malpractice and award damages to Pyle.

The power of the DUCK!

Why use I.R.A.C.?

The DeductiveEntailment

The deductive argument is the most complete relationship of logical support.

A deductive argument is valid or logically sound because its conclusion follows directly from its premises.

The only way to attack a deductive argument is by challenging the premises.

Syllogisms The Classic Example of the

Deductive Argument

1. All men are mortal. 2. Socrates is a man. 3. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

A=B, B=C, A=C– Transitivity

Parts of a Syllogism

Major premise: Broad statement of general rule.

Minor premise: Narrower statement of particular applicability.

Conclusion: Logical consequence of the major and minor premises.

The Syllogism as a legal analysis

Remember in the case of legal writing, the deductive argument takes the form of the mnemonic device, I.R.A.C

Identify the Issue Major premise is the Rule of law. Minor premise is the Application of law to

specific facts. The Conclusion is derived from the premises.

The ISSUE is whether a contract entered into between Tim and Mary is enforceable.

1. To be enforceable, a contract must be supported by consideration. RULE

2. The contract between Tim and Mary is not supported by consideration. APPLICATION

3. Therefore, the contract between Tim and Mary is not enforceable.CONCLUSION

Other forms of arguments:

Reasoning by analogyFactor AnalysisGeneralizations

What are the implicit limitations do these kinds arguments?