Legal Reasoning
IRAC - Building Block of
Legal Analysis
 Issue
 Rule
 Analysis
 Conclusion
IRAC - ISSUE
The facts of a case suggest an Issue.

Case Analysis
What is the question the
court is attempting to
answer?

Solving a Legal
Problem
What are the legal
problems the client
wants solved?
IRAC - RULE
The Issue is covered by a Rule of law.

Case Analysis
What legal authority is
the court applying in
this case?

Solving a Legal
Problem
What legal authority
applies to this case?
IRAC - Analysis
Compare the facts to the rule to form
the analysis.

Case Analysis
How did the court apply
the legal authority to
the facts of this case?

Solving a Legal
Problem
How does the legal
authority apply to the
unique facts of your
client’s case?
IRAC - Conclusion
From the analysis you come to a Conclusion
as to whether the rule applies to the facts.

Case Analysis
What was the court’s
decision? Have any new
theories of the law been
created?

Solving a Legal Problem
What is the proper outcome
for your client’s case?
What advice will you give
your client?
Case Brief

What is a Case Brief?

A law school case brief (case abstract) is a
formatted condensation of a reported case.
Case Brief

Why Brief Case?

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Case briefing serves number of purposes:
It is a learning tool
It helps you focus on the structure of the opinion and
on the thought process used by the judge
It prevents you from reading an opinion as if it were a
textbook – get you into the habit of reading an opinion
with a careful and critical eye.
It serves as a valuable study aid – easy to follow in
preparation for an exam
It gives you an opportunity to practice legal writings
Case Brief – the format
1.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE or HISTORY
OF THE CASE:


discussion of how the case ended up before
the appelate court
E.g. Defendant’s motion to dismiss was
granted and plaintiff appeals
Case Brief – the format
2.
STATEMENTS OF FACTS:

Brief outline of those facts that appear to
be significatnt to the court
Case Brief – the format
3.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE:

Description of the legal issue addressed
by the court
Case Brief – the format
4.
HOLDING OF THE CASE:

Summary of how the court resolved the
legal issue
Case Brief – the format
5.

RATIONALE:
The reasoning used by the court in
reaching its holding
Case Brief – the format
6.

COMMENTS/CRITICISMS:
Your own observations about the court’s
holding and rationale
The Names of the Parties of the Court
The party filing the suit: the PLAINTIFF („P” „Π”)
The party being sued: the DEFENDANT („D” „Δ”)
1.
2.

1.
2.

1.
2.
When a party is not seeking money but asking the court to
force the other party to do sth or not to do sth:
The PETITIONER
The RESPONDENT
When case moves through the appellate system:
The party bringing the appeal: the APPELLANT
The party against whom the appeal is brought: the
APPELLEE
The Procedural Posture

Each case that you read has a procedural
history:

Who sued whom, whether the case went to
trial, if a party filed any motions to dismiss,if a
party appealed, whether the appellate court
reviewed the case, whether the court
reversed or upheld the trial court’s decision.
Statement of Facts


In this section you should set out the facts
that you believe were important to the
court
A fact is worth mentioning in your case
brief if you believe that a change in the
fact could have changed the court’s
holding or reasoning
Statement of Issue



A well written opinion should state up front the issue to
be resolved
Sometimes judges assume that the issue is so obvious
that need not to be explicit
In other cases, courts may state the issue and then
actually move on to resolve the whole set of other
issues:

1.
2.
Example:
Where spouse are living together at the time of the accident as
husband and wife, does the doctrine of interspousal immunity
bar one from suing the other for negligence? Or
Does the doctrine of interspousal immunity bar one spouse
from suing the other tort?
Holding of the Case



This section of your brief should summarize the
court’s resolution of the issue.
The holding of the case is a measure of its
precedent-setting value.
A court may make statements that go beyond
the facts of the case:


Dictum (pl. Dicta): a statement in a court’s opinion
which are not part of its holding, and which are
broader that justied by the facts of the case
Dicta can provide valuable clues about how the court
would decide future cases involving different facts.
Rationale



The most important part of any decisions is the
thought process used by the judges in reaching
their holding.
The rationale of the court gives you a glimpse into
how the court or other courts might decide a
related case in the future.
Before you write the court’s rationale, you should
try to analyze the reasoning and see precisely
how the court’s argument is construed:



The court may give a specific test
The court may cite some cases or decide that the cited
by the parties cased do not apply
The court may say why certain legal principles/rules
do/do not apply
Comments and Criticisms



This is the place in your case brief where
you can summarize your observations
about the court’s decision
You may also raise any hypotheticals
You may add your own thought of the
case
Written Opinions



The "Opinion of the Court" gives the verdict and
explains the reasoning behind the decision
reached.
The privilege of writing the official opinion falls to
the most senior justice in the majority group, or
to the Chief Justice if he voted with the majority;
this person may choose to write the opinion, or
may assign the task to another member of the
majority.
If the justices who voted against the majority
wish to issue a unified opinion, they simply
decide amongst themselves who will write it.
Written Opinions


Individual justices may write their own
opinions, regardless of whether they agree
with the majority.
Justices may also "join" or sign any other
written opinion they agree with, even if
they agree with more than one point-ofview.
Written Opinions

Opinion of the Court - The official opinion,
whether unanimous or by majority vote

Majority opinion - Also called the "Opinion of
the Court," this is the official verdict in the case
that represents the vote of the majority of
justices

Plurality opinion - A concurring opinion joined
by more justices than the official Court opinion
Written Opinions

Dissenting opinion - An opinion written by a justice who
disagrees with the majority

Dissenting in part - An opinion written by a justice who
voted with the majority on the decision, but disagrees
with a portion of the reasoning in the majority opinion,
which he or she explains in writing

Unanimous opinion - An opinion authored by one
justice, often (but not always) the Chief Justice, and
signed by all justices

Concurring opinion - An opinion that agrees with the
decision but may disagree with the some of the reasoning
behind the Court opinion, or may elaborate on a point
made or introduce further relevant information

Concurring in part - Typically an opinion written by a
justice who voted against the majority, but agrees with a
portion of the majority opinion, which he or she explains in
writing

Concurring in judgment - An opinion written by a justice
who agrees with the decision, but not with the reasoning
used to reach the decision

Concurring in part and dissenting in part - An opinion
written by a justice who may have voted either way, but
wants to explain which points are in agreement and
which are in disagreement.

Per Curiam opinion: The opinion is given by the full
court, unsigned by the Justices

Seriatim opinion: Each justice on the Court writes his or
her own, separate opinion; there is no majority opinion,
only a majority verdict. This type of opinion was more
common in the 18th, and parts of the 19th, centuries
Terms



Certiorari is a legal term in Roman, English, and
American law referring to a type of writ seeking
judicial review.
Certiorari ("to be more fully informed") is Latin:
certiorare, ("to show, prove, or ascertain").
A writ of certiorari currently means an order by
a higher court directing a lower court, tribunal, or
public authority to send the record in a given
case for review.
Terms

Federal courts:

certiorari is most often seen as the writ that
the Supreme Court of the United States
issues to a lower court to review the lower
court's judgment for legal error and review
where no appeal is available as a matter of
right.