Critical Thinking Case Study 3 - IRAC is structure that all legal

Question # 00852846 Posted By: wildcraft Updated on: 04/05/2024 05:49 AM Due on: 04/05/2024
Subject General Questions Topic General General Questions Tutorials:
Dot Image

Green- Critical Thinking Case Study 3

Back to Top

IRAC is structure that all legal writing follows, so it is clearly understood. IRAC has four parts: Issue, Rule, Analysis (sometimes called Explanation), and Conclusion. Using IRAC will help ensure you don't miss any important parts of your legal analysis.

Issue State the issue or issues as you see them in the fact pa!ern. These can be in question or statement form.

Be specific! For example, “What is the cause of action the company can bring against its competitor for not delivering the product on time as promised?” The issue may be case specific or more general, like "Does a corporation have a duty to reject nonconforming goods before accepting them?"

If there is more than one issue, you must separate them. Also, you can create additional issues for your benefit, so you don’t forget to address them in the Analysis section. For example, “What is the cause of action the company can bring against its competitor for not delivering the product on time as promised?” May then cause you to ask, "What defense or defenses may the competitor raise for not delivering the product in a timely fashion?"

IRAC Method

1 Issue, Rule, Analysis, and Conclusion (IRAC)

Rule The rule is the legal standard or "test" applied to the fact pa!ern. Depending on the fact pa!ern, the rule may be the elements of the cause of action that applies.

The rule should be stated using the legal terms of art, don’t summarize or change the verbiage. For example, if you believe the cause of action is negligence, then the elements which create the legal standard are Duty, Breach, Causation, and Damages. Then you need to ask if there are smaller rules within the elements. For example, causation can be "in-fact" or "proximate." Those would be the smaller or sub-rules which also need to be explained.

Analysis/Explanation The analysis (which is the explanation) is the most in-depth part of your writing. It is also the most important part and should be an area you pay particular a!ention to.

Some people also refer to Analysis/Explanation as the "Application."

This is where you apply the Rule and Sub-Rules from above to the facts of the scenario. This is where you explain how you reached your conclusion by showing how each fact applies to the Rule. It is important always to analyze both sides of the scenario to present the complete picture. Analyzing both sides includes presenting any possible defenses like comparative negligence or assumption of the risk.

If the rule is a test with multiple elements or facts, then you must analyze each part from both sides and explain how the facts apply or do not apply to each.

Conclusion The conclusion is how you believe the situation will resolve itself a"er you’ve


2 General Writing Tips for Legal Analysis

3 IRAC Template Language

4 References

Analyzed in-depth the possibilities on both sides. This doesn't have to be long, but it must be complete.

Restate a summary of your Analysis, and then pick a side! For example, "Due to the lack of any facts that the owner was unaware, the teenagers would sneak into his backyard, it would be di#cult to establish any duty was owed to them since they were trespassers. Therefore, even if the rusty metal sheets were a breach of a general duty to maintain safe premises, it would not rise to the level of a specific duty based on the facts of this case."

Center for eLearning Privacy Policy?

Dot Image
Tutorials for this Question
  1. Tutorial # 00848327 Posted By: wildcraft Posted on: 04/05/2024 05:49 AM
    Puchased By: 2
    Tutorial Preview
    The solution of Critical Thinking Case Study 3 - IRAC is structure that all legal...
    Critical_Thinking_Case_Study_3_-_IRAC_is_structure_that_all_legal.ZIP (18.96 KB)

Great! We have found the solution of this question!

Whatsapp Lisa