IRAC Method for Analyzing Legal Cases

IRAC Method for Analyzing Legal Cases
Second step: Now,
rewrite in  IRAC format:
What facts and circumstances brought these parties
to court? This should actually be "1." and called Facts
1. Issue
What is the question before
the court? (Hint in legal
opinions it is usually
introduced with the word
"Whether. . . "
2. Rule
What is the governing law for the
3. Analysis
Apply the facts to each element of the law
Does the rule apply to these unique facts?
4. Conclusion
"From the analysis you come to a Conclusion as to whether
the rule applies to the facts."  Where are these quotes
coming from?
How does the court's holding modify the rule of
First step:
solve  the
IRAC Triad
Step 1:  What
gave rise to the
law suit? ( In other
words what is the
Are there buzzwords in the facts that suggest an
Read the case carefully to
identify the relevant facts
What are the non-issues?
Step 2: After
becoming familiar
with the facts,
identify the issue.
What question is
the court being
called on to
Identify the rule of law.  What
legal principles will the court
use to resolve the dispute
The legal issue would not exist unless some
event occurred.
The issue mechanically determines what rule  is
In determining the issue before the court consider whether the
court is deciding a question of fact i.e. the parties are
in dispute over what happened or a question of law i.e. the
court is unsure which rule to apply to these facts?
Step 3: What legal principle for
rule of law will the court rely on
to address  the issue you
What are the elements that prove
the rule?
From what authority does it come? Common law, statute, new
What's the underlying public policy behind
the rule?
Are there social considerations?
What are the exceptions to the
Step 4 Apply the
facts to the rule of
law to  form the
Which facts help prove which elements of the
Why are certain facts relevant?
How do these facts satisfy this rule?
What types of facts are applied to the rule?
How do these facts further the public policy underlying
What's the counter-argument for another solution?
Do the facts satisfy the requirements of
the rule?