As prospective law students learn it, what we call “legal reasoning” can be expressed through the RAIC formula. It stands for Issue, Rule, Application and Conclusion. This is the format used by lawyers when creating legal briefs. And the structure that most judges use to prepare legal opinions. It`s also the kind of analysis that law professors – and especially bar examiners – are looking for. The legal problem would not exist unless something happened. Importance. The RAIC is as central to legal analysis as E=mc2 is to legal analysis. More than three decades ago, Terri LeClercq, a law professor at the University of Texas and a leading authority on legal writing, called the RAIC “a golden acronym for organized legal discussion.” A recent article by Stephanie LaRose, a law professor at Michigan State University, confirms that, despite some criticism, “variants of the RAIC method continue to be the gold standard in legal briefs and short writings.” Get the gold! (Wikipedia lists more than 20 RAIC variants.) RAIC stands for Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion.
These words represent the steps of the most commonly accepted way of organizing a written legal analysis: first, articulate an important legal question or question; Next, indicate and explain the relevant legislation. Then, apply the rule to your facts; Finally, finish by explicitly answering the question or commenting on the topic. The RAIC is the most popular form of organization because it is usually the one that makes it easier for the reader to follow your analysis. Following the RAIC structure provides a framework around which you can organize your writing, making your discussion easier to write (and read). Notice how each item is methodically proven based on the facts provided. Even if something like entering seems self-evident, the fact that the defendant actually crossed the threshold must be indicated for the legal analysis to be complete. The RARACC is an elaborate form of RAIC: conclusion, rule, proof of rule, application, counter-argument, conclusion. The RR reminds you to clarify the relevant legal rule as you read it from the sources of legal authority (i.e. constitutions, laws, regulations and decision-making or customary law), and then back up this rule statement with an organized explanation and discussion of the legal authority on which the rule statement is based (i.e., proof of the rule). The CC reminds you to make important counter-arguments, i.e. approaches contrary to how you synthesized the rule or applied it to your facts before formulating your conclusion.
Any doubt that the RAIC is the key to success in writing essays in bar exams is dispelled by this passage from an article in The Bar Examiner published by the National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE): “A candidate must demonstrate mastery of the fundamentals of the RAIC (the structure-rule-application-conclusion-resulting from legal analysis).” Origin. Where does the RAIC come from? One researcher explains: “Although many researchers refer to the RAIC in the legal literature, there is no clear record of its origin.” The first mention of the RAIC found in a search of the legal literature was in 1961. An RAIC provides such an obvious conclusion by guiding the reader through the logical analysis of an argument: highlight the legal issues at stake, present the applicable legal rules, apply those rules to the relevant facts; and, finally, the logical conclusion of the argument in question. Identifying and indicating the legal conclusion that the court should reach, RAIC (Issue, Rule, Analysis and Conclusion) is the basic elements of legal analysis. This is the process by which all lawyers think about all legal issues. The beauty of the RAIC is that it allows you to reduce the complexity of the law to a simple equation. RAIC stands for the “Issue, Rule, Application, Conclusion” structure of legal analysis. An effective essay follows a form of RAIC structure in which it is organized around a “problem,” a “rule,” an “application,” and a “conclusion” for each individual problem and sub-problem identified as a legal problem. To reiterate, as a legal writer, you will be presented with a set of facts and will be asked to answer legal questions about them with a forward-looking or persuasive voice (unless your job involves drafting a law, will, or agreement that requires a different set of drafting, analytical, and planning skills). beyond the scope of this discussion).
As a law student, you are sometimes asked to write something that deals with a narrow topic (such as a short memo); Sometimes you will be asked to identify legal issues you can and resolve them (such as an answer to a certain type of exam question). More important legal issues can usually be broken down into a series of smaller questions, so you can divide each sub-question one by one, do “RAIC”, dispose of it, and then devote yourself fully to the next sub-question. When you take sub-questions apart, you should define and organize them in a way that covers all relevant legal rules and allows the reader to follow them easily. A good legal analysis of a set of facts is usually structured as a series of RAIC entities (or CRRACC). The key to such accurate communication is to provide the public with an effective and efficient argument by presenting all the relevant facts, the applicable rules and the logical framework of that argument. If all these elements are provided, the logical conclusion should be self-evident. Some professors may not want to see this language – the question is if. they get the same result, for example, with other words “Did” or “Can”. Don`t fixate on the tongue.
Follow your teacher`s instructions and find that in both cases you will get the same result: the identification of the legal problem. -> What facts and circumstances brought these parties to court? Give me an O. On the other hand, it is a useful “pinball”. Like a pinball machine, it is used to redirect the pinball upwards so that it can score additional points. Use it wherever there is more than one rule. The “Williston Rule” versus the “Corbin Rule” on word evidence could be an example if your contract professor has covered both. Model. Here`s an RAIC model I shared with my freshmen. It contains some words “triggers” (italics): The biggest mistake people make when writing exams is recognizing the problem and simply reciting the rule without doing the analysis. Most professors know that you can consult the law, but they want to check if you can apply the law to a specific set of circumstances. Analysis is the most important element of the RAIC, because it is where the real reflection takes place.
However, you need to develop problem recognition skills yourself in order to pass the exam well and become an effective lawyer. During the exam, the teacher will not report the problem. Ask yourself some of these questions as you read the case: Don committed an assault (or an offer was made, or the court can invoke personal jurisdiction) The trap for the negligent is to stop at the rule. Although the rule is the law, the art of the lawyer lies in the analysis. A contract must be in writing if it is not possible to execute it within one year. – Fraud Status Element 1) Although the door was opened and unlocked, Carl`s mere opening of the door was a minimum force sufficient to represent a breakage, as the nearly closed door was intended to prevent unwanted intrusion. No actual breakage of the door or lock is required. Note: Repeat the process for each identified issue – each issue forms the basis of a separate RAIC analysis. I`ve often seen students outperform points by not exploring all reasonable alternatives. That`s why I created my own RAIC variant by adding an O for On the Other Side. Get the gold. Win the war.
Use both hands. Achieve dissertation excellence with RAIC-O. Simply put, the rule is the law. The rule could be the common law developed by the courts or a statute enacted by Parliament. “The case revolves around the question of whether… OR: “Then we come to the fundamental question of the case. The fraud status is unlikely to apply in these circumstances and the oral contract is not invalid, even if it was not concluded within one year. Is opening an unlocked door of a building at dusk to commit theft sufficient to justify a burglary charge? Element 6) Theft of $5,000 is a crime in all states. Elements 2, 3 and 4) Carl has clearly entered the house, which is not his.
The house is considered an apartment, as Vince regularly uses the house for sleeping. -> How does the Court`s case-law change the rule of law? This article was originally published on the Thomas M. blog of Western Michigan University at Cooley Law School. Conclusions should be brief and expressed in terms of probability. 3. Daniel appealed the decision to the Federal Court of Appeal, which overturned the lower court`s decision on the grounds of technical error. In each of these examples, a hypothetical fact model is broken down into RAIC elements using the three steps of the RAIC triad. In law school case reports, the simplest way to isolate the problem is to look only at chapter titles of cases, such as “Personal Jurisdiction” in Civil Proceedings or “Offer and Acceptance” in Contracts. The cases you read also contain language that signals the important problem. For example, the judge will simply say: Bar examination courts were among the earliest proponents of the RAIC.